X Corp. v. Ellison
Case Details
- Court:
- U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
- Docket:
- 0:25-cv-01649-LMP-DLM
- Filed:
- April 23, 2025
- Status:
- Partial dismissal; First Amendment claims remain
- Plaintiff(s):
- X Corp.
- Defendant(s):
- Keith Ellison (Minnesota Attorney General)
- Law Challenged:
- Minnesota Statute § 609.771 (Political Deepfakes Prohibition)
- Legal Theories:
-
- First Amendment (content-based restriction, editorial discretion)
- Fourteenth Amendment (vagueness)
- Section 230 preemption
Summary
X Corp. challenged Minnesota's law criminalizing the dissemination of AI-generated political deepfakes within 90 days of a nominating convention or during the voting period. The statute prohibits knowingly distributing deepfakes with intent to injure a candidate or influence an election, with penalties up to 5 years imprisonment.
On December 2, 2025, the court dismissed X's Section 230 preemption claim for lack of standing, finding X failed to show it disseminates deepfakes with the required intent. First Amendment and vagueness claims remain pending. On August 26, 2026, X Corp. repleaded to add more facts supporting its standing.
Selected Documents
- 📄 CourtListener Docket
- 📄 Complaint (Apr 23, 2025)
- 📄 Order Denying Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Dec 2, 2025)
- 📄 Amended Complaint (Aug 26, 2026)
Timeline
Complaint Filed
X Corp. filed lawsuit challenging constitutionality of Minnesota's deepfake law (Minn. Stat. § 609.771, enacted in 2023).
Partial Stay Granted
Court stayed proceedings on First Amendment and vagueness claims pending resolution of related Kohls v. Ellison case, but allowed Section 230 claim to proceed.
Motion on the Pleadings
X Corp. files a motion for judgment on the pleadings for its Section 230 preemption claim.
Section 230 Claim Dismissed
Court dismissed without prejudice Section 230 claim for lack of Article III standing, finding X failed to plausibly demonstrate it disseminates deepfakes with intent to injure candidates.
Plaintiff files amended Complaint
X Corp. files an amended complaint to include more facts on standing