The recent decision by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to withdraw its lawsuit challenging Ethereum's security status, just before the approval of the spot Ethereum ETF, has sparked outrage within the XRP community. Prominent XRP community member Bill Morgan has criticized the SEC for its unequal treatment of Ethereum and Ripple, highlighting the arbitrary nature of the agency's approach to crypto regulations.

Ethereum's Second Free Pass from the SEC

Morgan pointed out that Ethereum has received a second free pass from the SEC, nearly six years after the Hinman speech, which provided clarity on the non-security status of Ethereum. This contrasts with the treatment Ripple has received, as the company has spent over $100 million dealing with the SEC's regulatory issues over the last three years.

Decentralization as a Made-up Factor

Some in the XRP community have also argued that since Ethereum is decentralized, why did the SEC have to write a letter to ConsenSys in the first place? Morgan stated that decentralization is all a made-up factor, and no one has ever explained how it categorizes whether a token is a commodity or a security.

Calls for Ripple to Sue the SEC

Pseudonymous analyst @digitalassetbuy has voiced strong criticism against the SEC's regulatory actions, while contrasting them with the treatment received by Ripple. The analyst labeled the government's actions as criminal and suggested that the top Ripple executives – Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen – should file a lawsuit against the SEC and others involved, calling it the "ETHGATE."

Potential Impact on XRP Price

One positive development in the XRP lawsuit could be that the SEC might reduce the $2 billion fine on Ripple. Any positive development could kickstart the XRP price rally towards $1, as the XRP community remains firm in its stance against the SEC's perceived biases.

Overall, the XRP community's outrage highlights the perceived inequalities in the SEC's approach to crypto regulations, and the call for Ripple to take legal action against the agency and others involved reflects the community's desire for a more fair and transparent regulatory environment.