Grayscale’s recent victory against the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] has undoubtedly brought about a significant shift. Numerous individuals within the industry acknowledged this triumph and engaged in discussions about its potential implications. Among these voices, Vivek Ramaswamy, a Republican candidate for the Presidential election, expressed his optimism towards Bitcoin [BTC], especially in light of Grayscale’s recent success.
Ramaswamy stands as one of the three remaining presidential contenders who have openly expressed their backing for the cryptocurrency sector. The other two are Robert Kennedy Jr. and Ron DeSantis. It’s the first time that a majority of these presidential candidates have advocated for the digital asset.
In a post on X, Ramaswamy criticized the “shadow” U.S. government. He held unnamed government agencies with abbreviated titles accountable for their unauthorized and rebellious endeavors. It appears that he might have been alluding to the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC].
In the post, he also says,
“This decision is strong and clears a path to keep Bitcoin & blockchain innovation in the U.S. instead of overseas.”
Crypto: Is it the Government or the Judiciary Providing Backing?
Highlighting the shortcomings of the government, the Presidential candidate spoke about how courts have been aiding crypto. He remarked that this circumstance has led to the U.S. judiciary serving as the ultimate defense to protect cryptocurrency visionaries in the country. Ramaswamy also observed that, in an ideal scenario, these issues should have been settled prior to reaching the legal system.
He also pointed out that the courts have taken a favorable stance towards cryptocurrency in recent months. Apart from declaring the SEC’s rejection of Grayscale’s ETF as unjust and unreasonable, the legal system also sided with Ripple against the SEC in July, affirming that XRP does not qualify as a security.
Ramaswamy has entered the industry with a plan. He further mentioned that if he were elected, he would revoke any federal regulations that do not meet the criteria set by the Supreme Court in the West Virginia vs. EPA case. This action could potentially curtail the SEC’s excessive authority over the industry.