Oregon’s Attorney General (AG) has filed a motion to keep the lawsuit against Coinbase in state court, following the crypto exchange’s efforts to move the litigation to federal court.
However, Oregon’s motion explains that “almost 50 years ago, the Supreme Court of Oregon, sitting en banc, broke stride with Howey in its interpretation of an ‘investment contract’ under the OSL, deciding the term should be ‘modified’ to encompass a broader range of investment schemes. Pratt v. Kross, 276, Or. 483, 497 (1976).”
Since then, Oregon courts have followed the Pratt Test, which applies a broader definition of investment contract. The AG noted that “because Oregon does not strictly follow the Howey test, the State’s claims here do not turn on the Howey test.”
The motion claims that the lawsuit isn’t a “regulatory land grab,” as Coinbase called it. Instead, it is a “quintessential state law action” that seeks redress on behalf of Oregonians under the state’s law. Therefore, it should be “adjudicated by the state court in which the Attorney General filed it.”
On April 18, Oregon’s AG filed a complaint in Multnomah County Circuit Court against Coinbase, alleging the crypto exchange had violated the Oregon securities law by facilitating the sale of unregistered cryptocurrencies to the state’s residents.
Following the news, Coinbase’s CLO, Paul Grewal, affirmed that Rayfield is “literally picking up where the Gary Gensler SEC left off,” adding that the lawsuit is a “copycat case” attempting to “resurrect” the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) long-criticized regulatory approach under the previous administration.
Oregon’s lawsuit now claims that Coinbase sold high-risk investments without properly vetting to protect consumers, which has caused significant losses for Oregonians. Notably, the case covers significantly more tokens than the SEC originally named in its case, which listed 13 tokens. The lawsuit claims that the crypto exchange offered and sold 31 cryptocurrencies as investment contracts.
In most places, it’s 2025. But the Oregon AG still thinks it’s 2023 with his Gensler-era @secgov copycat suit. Yesterday, he asked the federal court to send the case back to his home state court. This pursuit of a patchwork of state regulation – especially against the historic progress towards a unified federal framework – only helps politicians and harms consumers.
