The critical takeaway here isn't about memecoins. 

It's that the SEC's interpretation of Howey continues to be that an investment contract may exist based on the "economic reality" of an arrangement.

The SEC's recent optimistic approach to the industry and the dismissal of many of its cases has led a lot of people to believe that "everything is legal". 

That's particularly true because most of the cases the SEC has been dropping/settling involved arguments by the defendants that, rather than "economic reality," Howey's investment contract analysis hinged on whether there was a formal contract. 

So, if the dismissals were a sign that the SEC was accepting of this "predicate contract" argument (and abandoning the "economic reality" argument), nearly every token in existence would be legal. 

This release confirms the SEC doesn't believe "everything is legal" and that's a good thing.

Trying to solve more problems than I cause @a16zcrypto

https://linktr.ee/milesjennings

Does this mean that memecoins with fair launches are legal, but the ones that rug are illegal because they differ in the economic realities?

If they’re true memecoins, then they aren’t going to be regulated as securities in either case. But in the case of the rug pull, fraud may be in play.