Absolutely not true.
Again, show us in their Terms of Service or other documentation, marketing, or public statements that affirm pari passu redemption rights. They implied it by association with L0’s OFT standard, but they did not ever guarantee it or even reference it.
The question is if a court of law would uphold the distinction. Based on Ripple vs SEC, the friction and sophistication of just being on an L2, and plausible deniability by Kelp, it’s very likely they would indeed recognize asset class distinction. This might have been different if L2 rsETH was minted off L2 ETH, like how USDC is setup, but the fact is L2 rsETH is an adapter escrow IOU, not a direct claim on the underlying asset.