Elon Musk's X sues to overturn Minnesota political deepfakes ban
[April 26, 2025] By
STEVE KARNOWSKI
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — X Corp., the social media platform owned by Trump
adviser Elon Musk, is challenging the constitutionality of a Minnesota
ban on using deepfakes to influence elections and harm candidates,
saying it violates First Amendment speech protections.
The company's federal lawsuit filed this week also contends that the
2023 state law is preempted by a 1996 federal statute that shields
social media from being held responsible for material posted on their
platforms.
“While the law's reference to banning ‘deep fakes’ might sound benign,
in reality it would criminalize innocuous, election-related speech,
including humor, and make social-media platforms criminally liable for
censoring such speech," the company said in a statement. “Instead of
defending democracy, this law would erode it.”
Minnesota's law imposes criminal penalties — including jail time — for
disseminating a deepfake video, image or audio if a person knows it's
fake, or acts with reckless disregard to its authenticity, either within
90 days before a party nominating convention, or after the start of
early voting in a primary or general election.
It says the intent must be to injure a candidate or influence an
election result. And it defines deepfakes as material so realistic that
a reasonable person would believe it's real, and generated by artificial
intelligence or other technical means.
“Elon Musk funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into the 2024
presidential election and tried to buy a Wisconsin Supreme Court seat,"
said the law's author, Democratic state Sen. Erin Maye Quade.

"Of course he is upset that Minnesota law prevents him from spreading
deepfakes that meant to harm candidates and influence elections.
Minnesota’s law is clear and precise, while this lawsuit is petty,
misguided and a waste of the Attorney General Office’s time and
resources,” her statement said.
Democratic Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison's office, which is
legally obligated to defend the constitutionality of state laws in
court, said in a statement that it's “reviewing the lawsuit and will
respond in the appropriate time and manner.”
The Minnesota law was already the subject of a constitutional challenge
by Christopher Kohls, a content creator, and GOP state Rep. Mary Franson,
who likes to post AI-generated parodies of politicians. That case is on
hold while they appeal to overturn a judge's denial of their request to
suspend the law.
[to top of second column] |

Elon Musk flashes his T-shirt that reads "DOGE" to the media as he
walks on South Lawn of the White House, in Washington, March 9,
2025. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)
 The attorney general's office argues
in that case that deepfakes are a real and growing threat to free
elections and democratic institutions, that the law is a legitimate
and constitutional response to the problem, and that it contains
important limitations on its scope that protect satire and parody.
X, formerly known as Twitter, said it's the only social media
platform challenging the Minnesota law, and that it has also
challenged other laws it considers infringements of free speech,
such as a 2024 California political deepfakes law that a judge has
blocked.
X said in its statement that its “Community Notes” feature allows
users to flag content they consider problematic, and that it's been
adopted by Facebook, YouTube and TikTok. The company's lawsuit said
its “Authenticity Policy” and “Grok AI” tool provide additional
safeguards.
Alan Rozenshtein, a University of Minnesota law professor and expert
on technology law, said in an interview Friday that it's important
to separate the free-speech issues from whatever one thinks about
the controversial Musk.
“I'm almost positive that this will be struck down,” Rozenshtein
said.
There's no exception under the First Amendment for false or
misleading political speech, even lies, he said. And the potential
for criminal penalties gives social media companies like X and
Facebook “an incentive to take down anything that might be a
deepfake. ... You're going to censor a massive amount to comply with
this law.”
Deepfakes aren't good, but it would be nice to get evidence that
they're causing actual problems before imposing such limits on free
speech, the professor said. And while it's easy to focus on the
supply of misinformation, the large demand for it is the problem.
“People want to be fooled, and it's very bad for our democracy, but
it’s not something I think can be solved with a deepfakes ban," he
said.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |