Supreme Court Rules Against Coinbase in Dogecoin Giveaway Dispute
The Supreme Court has ruled against Coinbase in a dispute over a dogecoin giveaway from 2021. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson stated that a court, rather than an arbitrator, should determine which contract governs when there are multiple contracts in conflict. The ruling emphasized that arbitration is contingent on contract and consent, rejecting Coinbase's argument that it would lead to chaos.
Coinbase Responds to Ruling
"What a week. Some you win. Some you lose. We are grateful for having had the opportunity to present our case to the Court and appreciate the Court's consideration of this matter." - [@iampaulgrewal](https://t.co/FLTKRU7UUG)
Consumer Allegations and Contractual Disputes
Consumers alleged that they were misled into paying $100 to enter the sweepstakes. While a general user agreement required arbitration, a sweepstakes-specific contract stipulated that disputes must be brought in California courts. The Supreme Court declined to address whether the appeals court was correct in ruling that the sweepstakes contract superseded the user agreement.
Implications for Consumer Protection and Arbitration
Justice Neil Gorsuch underscored the contractual nature of arbitration, suggesting that outcomes may vary based on the specific agreements between parties. The decision represents a significant development in consumer protection law, reflecting a broader legal trend regarding arbitration agreements.
XRP Listing Reopening in New York
In a separate development, Coinbase's head lawyer announced that the crypto exchange will reinstate the XRP listing for New York state residents. This news has been met with optimism by investors, boosting XRP's value by 1.5% despite ongoing market volatility.