I can certainly appreciate the disdain some have for regulatory oversight, lord knows there's plenty of regulations that have questionable benefit, and in some cases a net harm. I tend to lean libertarian with this sort of thing in that regulation should be limited to no further than protecting the public from a health/safety and/or a consumer standpoint.

An example I can think of in my jurisdiction:

There were city bylaws in place that limited liquor store 1) proximity to schools, and 2) proximity to each other. The first one is well-intentioned and likely a net good in that it protects children from any alcohol related crime or social issues in the vicinity. The second is, bluntly, anticompetitive and likely is a net harm for the consumer - in fact I know of at least one example where a liquor store chain set up a shell of a store to block the nearby Costco from opening one. Fortunately the second one has since been repealed.

With respect to the SEC action, in my mind this is legal action done to crack down on scammers. Do I like or agree with everything the SEC does? Hardly. But I feel like the motivation behind this action is pretty clear - some of these tokens and exchanges have violated securities laws.