The SEC approved Ethereum ETFs through delegated authority, a decision that could significantly influence the crypto market. Unlike the Bitcoin ETF approval in January, which required an SEC vote, this approval did not involve a public voting process by commissioners. James Seyffart noted that although any commissioner, like Crenshaw, can request a review, it would not change the decision.

The absence of a public vote has led to questions about the political dynamics within the SEC. Seyffart points out that while delegated authority is common for many decisions, the lack of transparency here raises speculation about the commissioners' positions. Without a detailed voting record, the political lines during the approval process remain unclear.

Gabriel Shapiro from MetaLeX remarked on the procedural details, noting that only 19b-4s were approved, not S-1s. He argued that this technical distinction explains why Ethereum's price did not significantly increase after the news, suggesting the approval could still be overturned.

This confusion prompted Bloomberg ETF expert Eric Balchunas to clarify that the approval process was standard and unlikely to be "challenged in any meaningful way." Balchunas emphasized that while the approval is final, the procedure used was typical for the SEC. He suggested the muted market reaction was due to the anticipated approval, especially after significant news earlier in the week.

The approval of Ethereum ETFs signals a potentially positive outlook for future crypto ETF applications. However, the SEC's delegated authority process has sparked discussions about the need for greater transparency and the possible political influences behind such decisions.