Ripple’s leadership and Bitcoiners have found themselves in a tense conflict over a proposed U.S. government crypto stockpile. Digital assets have gained more recognition after the cryptocurrency industry’s successes in Washington, D.C. last year. President Donald Trump issued a crypto executive order that many expected to focus on a federal Bitcoin reserve. Instead, his order mentioned a possible government digital asset reserve but did not refer to Bitcoin alone. This detail upset some Bitcoiners, who believe the original plan for a strategic Bitcoin reserve was derailed by Ripple Labs and its lobbying efforts.
Jack Mallers, who leads the Bitcoin payments firm Zap, expressed anger that Ripple might have influenced the White House to remove the word “Bitcoin” from the plan. Bitcoin maximalists say Ripple wants a broader federal crypto reserve that includes the XRP token. Ripple’s CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, did not deny that he hopes XRP will appear in any official U.S. digital asset stockpile. He stated that a crypto reserve should not limit itself to a single token. Critics say that approach hurts the decentralized nature of Bitcoin while promoting a more centralized asset like XRP.
XRP exists under the shadow of an ongoing SEC lawsuit against Ripple. This lawsuit questions whether XRP sales involved unregistered securities transactions. The Howey Test is at the center of this legal fight. The SEC claims Ripple’s promotional activities might have created an expectation of profit among retail investors, which could classify XRP as an investment contract. A judge offered a partial ruling that relieved Ripple of some charges, but the SEC filed an appeal. This case could change how the U.S. government treats tokens that are not as decentralized as Bitcoin.
Bitcoiners often point to XRP’s large supply in the hands of Ripple Labs as evidence that the token is less transparent. They claim Bitcoin, despite having developers at organizations like Blockstream, remains more decentralized. Bitcoin’s anonymous creator is not tied to a single company, while Ripple’s role in XRP’s issuance has drawn criticism. Samson Mow, who once guided El Salvador’s move to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender, argues that Bitcoin’s open structure makes it more suitable for a government stockpile than a token linked to a private firm.
Ripple is no stranger to political influence. It supported crypto super PACs that helped sway decision-makers, and it donated to various campaigns in Washington. Some industry watchers believe Ripple’s deep pockets let it push for a future digital asset reserve that includes XRP. Critics view this as an attempt to gain broader acceptance for the token and boost the XRP price. They warn that a government digital asset reserve that holds XRP could raise concerns about centralization and the impact on retail investors.
Bitcoiners want a strategic Bitcoin reserve because they see Bitcoin as the most established and trusted crypto asset. They stress its resilience, built on decentralized blockchain technology. Many in the cryptocurrency industry saw Trump’s executive order as a way to align with that view. They expected an official Bitcoin stockpile that would secure America’s position in digital assets. Instead, they worry that the open-ended language in the order could allow altcoins like XRP to gain special status if the government chooses to hold a range of tokens.
Ripple’s CEO stands by the idea that the cryptocurrency industry should work together on a federal crypto reserve. He believes that focusing on one token leads to harmful crypto maximalism. Garlinghouse rejects the argument that Ripple has acted against Bitcoin’s interests. He says Ripple supports a broader approach to blockchain technology and wants the U.S. Congress to pass crypto legislation that fosters growth for many digital assets. Still, Bitcoiners claim Ripple’s lobbying overshadowed efforts to create a purely Bitcoin-based stockpile.
Senator Cynthia Lummis, a champion of crypto adoption in the U.S., warns that internal battles damage the entire industry’s credibility. She says lawmakers on Capitol Hill need the crypto community to speak with one voice when it comes to regulation. If Ripple and Bitcoin maximalists cannot find common ground, she feels their rivalries will harm attempts to pass clear legislation on blockchain-based reserves. This risk comes at a time when the White House wants to explore a national digital asset strategy.
The conflict between Bitcoiners and altcoin advocates includes more than the idea of a strategic asset reserve. Some believe that lobbying drives policy in ways that benefit corporations rather than public trust. These people worry that a powerful company like Ripple Labs can shift government plans to favor centralized tokens. Others say a multi-coin reserve gives the U.S. more flexibility. They point to events overseas, such as El Salvador adopting Bitcoin, to show that a single token approach might not always suit every nation’s goals.
The issue also involves how this reserve might shape the cryptocurrency market. If XRP wins a spot in a U.S. crypto stockpile, its popularity could rise, and the XRP price might go up. That prospect alarms Bitcoiners who want to maintain Bitcoin’s dominance as the top digital asset. They argue that national security calls for a cryptocurrency that does not rely on one corporation’s direction. Blockchain technology thrives on decentralization, so mixing a centralized approach with a federal stockpile raises tricky questions.
The SEC lawsuit against Ripple adds more uncertainty. If the court finds that XRP is an unregistered security, that ruling might limit the government’s willingness to include it in a federal crypto reserve. The final outcome of this legal battle will likely influence how regulators view altcoins across the industry. Garlinghouse says Ripple’s legal troubles do not define the real value of XRP, yet many skeptics remain uneasy. They ask how a token under this much scrutiny can become part of a formal government plan.
Meanwhile, Bitcoiners keep pushing for a strategic Bitcoin reserve. They remind people that Bitcoin’s supply and network security remain stable. They see a Bitcoin stockpile as a safer route for America, given its track record and broad support among crypto enthusiasts. Samson Mow notes how his team assisted El Salvador with adopting Bitcoin as legal tender, and he suggests the U.S. government would benefit from similar advice. Jack Mallers goes further by claiming that any alternative plan weakens national security and trust in the cryptocurrency industry.
Supporters of a more inclusive government digital asset reserve claim it would let officials explore different use cases. They say the cryptocurrency industry has grown beyond Bitcoin and that altcoins, including XRP, bring different features. This approach might include technologies that aim to make cross-border payments faster or reduce transaction fees. Ripple’s role in funding political campaigns and lobbying for XRP adoption shows it wants an active place in shaping crypto regulations. By promoting a broader reserve, Ripple seeks to protect its own interests and highlight the usefulness of its token in practical settings.
Observers see that disagreements within the crypto community could slow any official progress. White House staffers may grow tired of chain politics and infighting that force them to pick sides. Lawmakers like Senator Lummis worry that these divides risk the entire industry’s momentum on Capitol Hill. Even if many see a federal crypto reserve as a big step forward, a lack of unity might stop it from happening. The U.S. government wants a clear path, so the conflict between Bitcoin maximalism and Ripple’s broader stance could make leaders hesitant.
Ripple’s leadership and Bitcoiners remain at odds over how the U.S. should manage a strategic asset reserve. The future of any stockpile, whether it includes Bitcoin alone or a wider range of cryptocurrencies, depends on how politicians and regulators respond. The SEC appeal in the Ripple lawsuit, combined with the White House’s open-ended language about digital asset reserves, sets the stage for further battles. Each side believes its approach safeguards national interests and ensures a bright future for the cryptocurrency industry. The outcome could redefine how the federal government views blockchain-based reserves and whether assets like XRP stand beside Bitcoin in official holdings.
