The appearance of the XRP cryptocurrency logo on the uniforms of the University of Kansas sports teams, the Kansas Jayhawks, has sparked a fierce legal debate on social media.
Amid calls to completely ban the promotion of digital assets among students, Ripple CTO Emeritus David Schwartz explained why any attempt to block such advertising would be impossible under the U.S. Constitution.
The United States has the First Amendment. If you want to restrict or can speech, you need to find some exception it fits into. I don't think there is one here. See the cases I cited including one involving liquor and one involving gambling.
HOT Stories SBI's Solana News Is Not Bad for XRP, Analyst Says Near Protocol (NEAR), XRP, Shiba Inu (SHIB) and Dogecoin (DOGE) Price Analysis For July 15: Bears Are Slowly Losing Trend— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) July 14, 2026The dispute was triggered by the announcement of a historic partnership between the university's athletic department and Ripple. For Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse, an alumnus of the university, the deal was a personal milestone.
However, online critics reacted harshly to the integration, arguing that cryptocurrency advertising in sports should be banned alongside gambling, tobacco, and alcohol promotions.
How David Schwartz used the First Amendment to defend sports ads
Schwartz quickly countered this by pointing out that in the West, governments do not typically ban legal commerce ads on campuses, highlighting a critical legal distinction — if a product is lawful to sell, it is constitutionally lawful to promote.
Rather than engaging in the usual arguments about technology, David Schwartz responded by citing the U.S. Constitution. He noted that the First Amendment protects freedom of commercial speech.
"The government cannot suppress truthful commercial speech merely because it possesses greater powers to regulate things other than speech, nor to prevent the public from making bad, but lawful, decisions," Schwartz emphasized.
You Might Also Like
Tue, 07/14/2026 - 20:40 Ripple Burns Another 10 Million RLUSDByAlex Dovbnya
To support his argument, he cited landmark U.S. Supreme Court cases, including 44 Liquormart v. Rhode Island, which concerned restrictions on alcohol advertising, and Greater New Orleans Broadcasting v. United States, which addressed casino advertising.
According to Schwartz's reasoning, if XRP is legal, any attempt to block its advertising without compelling constitutional grounds would amount to direct censorship. As long as XRP is officially recognized as a commodity, any effort to restrict its promotion could be viewed by the courts as a violation of freedom of speech.
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
