XRP feud escalates into $30m defamation lawsuit

Court records show the complaint was lodged on January 9, 2026, in the U. S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Claver’s filing claims that Rector, who commands a large following on social media platforms popular with retail crypto traders, repeatedly published statements portraying Claver as dishonest and engaged in fraudulent conduct. The suit argues those claims were false, amplified across multiple channels and made with reckless disregard for the truth.

At the centre of the case is the growing influence of online personalities in digital-asset markets, where commentary can rapidly sway sentiment and affect business prospects. Claver alleges that Rector’s posts triggered a cascade of reputational harm, including the loss of partnerships, exclusion from industry events and increased scrutiny from service providers. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages, contending that the alleged conduct crossed the line from opinion into actionable defamation.

Rector has publicly rejected the allegations, framing his commentary as protected speech and fair criticism. In posts to followers, he has maintained that his remarks reflected genuine concerns shared by parts of the XRP community and were not intended to mislead. Legal filings indicate his defence is expected to rely heavily on First Amendment protections and the distinction between statements of fact and opinion.

The dispute underscores a broader tension playing out across crypto markets as influencers assume roles once held by analysts and journalists. With audiences numbering in the hundreds of thousands, prominent commentators can shape narratives around tokens, projects and personalities within hours. Legal experts note that courts are increasingly being asked to weigh how traditional defamation standards apply to decentralised, fast-moving online ecosystems.

Claver’s lawsuit sets out a detailed chronology of posts, videos and livestreams that he says painted him as untrustworthy. According to the filing, the material was repeated even after requests for corrections or retractions, strengthening the claim of malice. The complaint also points to alleged financial impacts, including stalled ventures and higher compliance costs, to justify the scale of damages sought.

While defamation cases involving social media figures are not new, the $30 million figure places this dispute at the upper end of claims tied to digital-asset commentary. Previous lawsuits in the sector have often settled quietly or been dismissed at early stages. Observers say the outcome could influence how aggressively influencers police their language when discussing individuals rather than projects.

The case arrives at a time when regulators and courts are paying closer attention to market manipulation and misinformation in crypto. Although the lawsuit is a private civil action, its progress will be watched closely by exchanges, project founders and content creators alike. A ruling that favours Claver could embolden others who believe online criticism has crossed legal boundaries, while a dismissal could reinforce broad speech protections for commentators.

Procedurally, the court will first assess whether the statements cited constitute verifiable claims of fact and whether Claver qualifies as a public figure, a designation that would raise the bar for proving defamation. Motions to dismiss are expected in the coming weeks, potentially narrowing the scope of the case before any discovery phase.