Elon Musk has proven he can dish out lawsuits in addition to he fights them.
Musk and his firms have filed no less than 23 lawsuits in federal courts alone since July of 2023, a Fortune evaluation of federal courtroom data exhibits. Mixed with state fits, Musk, Tesla, X, and SpaceX have sued opponents, start-ups, legislation companies, watchdog teams, people, the state of California, federal businesses, and popstar Grimes, who’s the mom of three of his kids.
Musk has been so legally aggressive that one choose determined his litigation was extra about revenge than justice: “This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech,” the choose mentioned.
In interviews with Fortune, legislation professors who’ve studied Musk mentioned the lawsuits show a combative, typically retaliatory method towards litigation. In circumstances in opposition to small nonprofits which have criticized his content material moderation insurance policies on X, in addition to fits in opposition to the Division of Justice and Nationwide Labor Relations Board referring to his therapy of workers, Musk often goes on the offensive when his enterprise practices are challenged by outsiders.
Angela Aneiros, a legislation professor at Gonzaga College, advised Fortune the fits Musk has filed are fueled by the billionaire’s wealth and affect. Musk “isn’t dissuaded by losing,” she mentioned, and he has the sources to litigate, enchantment, and relitigate disputes till he wins.
“[Musk and his companies] are bringing these lawsuits to punish whoever he’s suing for criticizing him or pointing out the truth,” Aneiros mentioned. “He’s just like, ‘I want to punish you, and I have the ability to do that.’”
X, SpaceX, and the legislation companies representing Musk in federal circumstances didn’t reply to a number of requests for remark.
A number of the complaints Musk has introduced are centered round defending his enterprise pursuits. After California handed a legislation forcing social media firms to publish their insurance policies round policing hate speech and disinformation, X sued the state on the grounds the legislation violated free speech protections. Tesla, which is listed as a plaintiff in additional federal circumstances than every other Musk firm (12), alleged in a swimsuit this summer time that one in all its suppliers misappropriated commerce secrets and techniques. The defendant, Matthews Worldwide Corp., referred to as the criticism meritless and “a new tactic in their ongoing efforts to bully Matthews.”
Others seem extra private. In 2023, X sued a distinguished Wall Road legislation agency employed by Twitter’s earlier administration the yr prior after Musk tried to again out of his settlement to buy the corporate. The swimsuit alleged Twitter’s $90 million cost to the agency was an “unjust enrichment,” and that the agency “took funds from the company cash register while the keys were being handed over.” The legislation agency has denied X’s claims. The case stays open and a choose has dominated the dispute needs to be despatched to arbitration. In one other submitting final September, Musk sued Grimes (actual title Claire Boucher) to determine a parent-child relationship with their three kids. Grimes has filed her personal custody swimsuit in opposition to Musk in California, and the case was sealed in December.
X Corp. and promoting
X, Musk’s most up-to-date enterprise enterprise, has been the billionaire’s most controversial car for litigation within the final yr. Since July of 2023, the corporate has filed no less than seven federal lawsuits on a spread of disputes. Most have been associated to X’s content material moderation insurance policies and advert income.
Final August, the corporate sued the Heart for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a watchdog group working to cease on-line hate speech, after they launched a report claiming that, below Musk, Twitter had reinstated accounts of “neo-Nazis, white supremacists, misogynists and spreaders of dangerous conspiracy theories.”
X responded with a criticism of its personal which accused CCDH of scraping knowledge off the location—a breach of its phrases of service—and alleged that the watchdog group’s report had value the corporate “tens of millions of dollars” in advert income.
Musk’s swimsuit, filed in federal courtroom within the Northern District of California, was thrown out by Decide Charles Breyer, who wrote in his resolution that, regardless of what X claimed in its criticism, the guts of the lawsuit was about “punishing the Defendants for their speech.”
“Sometimes it is unclear what is driving a litigation, and only by reading between the lines of a complaint can one attempt to surmise a plaintiff’s true purpose,” Breyer wrote. “Other times, a complaint is so unabashedly and vociferously about one thing that there can be no mistaking that purpose. This case represents the latter circumstance.”
However even because the case in opposition to CCDH was dismissed unequivocally, Musk and X have continued to convey litigation in opposition to teams who’ve raised issues in regards to the firm’s moderation insurance policies and disrupted the platform’s advert income.
In November, X sued the liberal advocacy group Media Issues after it printed a report alleging the social media web site had positioned advertisements for manufacturers like IBM, Oracle, and Apple subsequent to posts idealizing Hitler and the Nazis, inflicting a number of the sponsors to pause their promoting. The nonprofits president has referred to as the lawsuit “frivolous” and has stood behind its reporting.
Simply this month, Musk declared “war” on an promoting group often called GARM, accusing the nonprofit in a recent lawsuit of violating antitrust legal guidelines by colluding with a gaggle of manufacturers to drag advert spending from X after Musk acquired it in 2022. The courtroom has issued summons to the defendants named within the criticism. In response to the swimsuit, GARM’s mother or father group, the World Federation of Advertisers, which can also be named within the criticism, introduced it was discontinuing this system on account of restricted sources.
“GARM is a small, not-for-profit initiative,” the group mentioned in a press release. “Recent allegations that unfortunately misconstrue its purpose and activities have caused a distraction and significantly drained its resources and finances.” The group has not but filed a response in courtroom.
Musk can also be personally bankrolling a swimsuit in opposition to Disney—which paused promoting on X final yr—introduced by former Mandalorian actress Gina Carano over her termination. Disney has claimed First Modification protections and the case is headed for trial in 2025.
“He wants the best of both worlds,” Aneiros advised Fortune. “He wants to be able to say whatever he wants to say, and he wants some ruling to say that [other] companies can’t do anything, because it’s free speech.”
“If he can get past a motion to dismiss and extend litigation, a lot of these [groups] that he’s suing … they don’t have the power to continue to fight,” Aneiros mentioned. “That is really, really concerning to me. Musk can bring these baseless lawsuits, he has these unlimited funds, and rather than fight it these companies will just shut down.”
GARM isn’t the one nonprofit that has been outgunned by the billionaire. Media Issues introduced in Might they have been compelled to layoff greater than a dozen workers members, partially on account of the price of the authorized battle with Musk. CCDH’s present web site features a hyperlink to donate together with a notice that claims “fighting against Elon Musk’s lawsuit has cost us thousands of dollars and delayed our work to hold social media giants accountable.”
Discussion board procuring
A part of the rationale Musk seems unaffected by prior authorized defeats could also be as a result of his ways have modified.
Not too long ago, some authorized specialists have accused the billionaire of “forum shopping”—the apply by which litigants select courts or jurisdictions which are most probably to provide them favorable ruling—and one choose in Texas appears to have grow to be a specific favourite.
Whereas the CCDH swimsuit was filed in California, X introduced the Media Issues case earlier than U.S. choose Reed O’Connor in Fort Value, regardless that neither celebration relies in Texas. O’Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, is a contributor to the Federalist Society who has handed down favorable rulings for conservatives previously. His most up-to-date monetary disclosures present he’s invested between $15,001 and $50,000 in Tesla inventory.
As with CCDH, Media Issues filed a movement to dismiss X’s case in opposition to it, however O’Connor has allowed the discovery course of to start.
Aneiros advised Fortune the Media Issues case was one of many lawsuits Musk is concerned in that she is watching most carefully.
“It has the potential to force companies not to say things because they don’t want to get sued if they criticize X or Musk,” she mentioned. “I don’t know what’s going to happen in that case. I don’t think it should be any different than the CCDH case, but because it’s in front of that other judge, we’ll see what happens with that one.”
Till not too long ago, O’Connor was presiding over the case in opposition to advertisers as nicely, however recused himself on August 13. Though the choose gave no motive for his recusal, the announcement got here shortly after NPR printed a report highlighting his Tesla investments.
O’Connor’s workplace didn’t reply to Fortune’s requests for remark.
SpaceX and employment disputes
Fort Value isn’t the one favorable jurisdiction Musk has present in Texas.
In August, 2023, the DOJ filed a criticism in opposition to SpaceX alleging the corporate routinely discriminated in opposition to refugees and asylum seekers in its hiring course of. In response to the swimsuit Musk referred to as the criticism “a weaponization of the DOJ for political purposes”, and in September the rocket and satellite tv for pc maker hit again with a lawsuit of its personal in Brownsville, Texas.
Within the swimsuit, SpaceX complained that the method for appointing administrative judges who hear circumstances involving employment bias in opposition to immigrants was unconstitutional. U.S. district choose Rolando Olvera, a Trump appointee, backed the corporate’s declare, suspending the DOJ case in opposition to SpaceX.
Joan MacLeod Heminway, a legislation professor on the College of Tennessee, advised Fortune that Musk has taken a conservative view on the facility of federal businesses and their potential to control companies.
“I think the advice of counsel that he’s getting is that there are some openings for those kinds of lawsuits now,” Heminway mentioned. “We’re in a very dynamic stage—especially when it comes to government lawsuits—with respect to federal agencies and how much power they should have.”
It’s a technique SpaceX has employed greater than as soon as, and the corporate has fought tooth and nail to maintain different circumstances in Texas. After the U.S. Labor Relations Board accused the rocket maker of illegally firing workers, SpaceX filed a swimsuit in opposition to the NLRB a day later, once more calling into query the constitutionality of the federal government company’s construction. Just like the DOJ swimsuit, the criticism was filed in Brownsville.
This time although, Decide Olvera dominated the case needed to be transferred to California, the place the occasions that triggered the swimsuit occurred.
In a posh string of authorized motions SpaceX then appealed to a U.S. circuit courtroom twice to have the switch reconsidered. The appeals courtroom lastly granted the corporate a short lived block on the NLRB case in Might. The case remains to be in Brownsville, although the NLRB has been given approval to maneuver to switch it to California.
The truth is, the corporate filed a second swimsuit in opposition to the NLRB within the spring on the identical concern, this time in Waco, Texas, below one other Trump appointee, Decide Alan Albright. Beneath a standing order, all non-patent civil circumstances in Waco are assigned to Albright (Olvera, in Brownsville, will get 50% of civil circumstances). Albright granted SpaceX a short lived block on the NLRB case in July.
“He doesn’t like losing, and if he loses based on a current rule, he’s going to challenge the rule,” Heminway advised Fortune. “Or he’s going to challenge the ruling if it’s not made by the highest authority in the land.”
Elon Musk’s private authorized battles
In private authorized battles, Musk has proven an equal dedication to see issues by means of. Earlier this yr, the billionaire filed a swimsuit in opposition to OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman. Musk, who co-founded the startup, and has since launched his personal AI enterprise, accused OpenAI of abandoning its mission to develop synthetic intelligence for the advantage of humanity somewhat than for revenue.
This summer time, Musk withdrew the swimsuit, filed in San Francisco’s Superior Court docket, at some point earlier than a choose was ready to listen to OpenAI’s movement to dismiss the case. However on Aug. 5 Musk doubled down with a brand new criticism.
Not like the earlier criticism, the brand new case has been filed in federal courtroom. The federal case allowed Musk’s lawyer Marc Toberoff to incorporate allegations of civil racketeering, whose swimsuit argues that OpenAI and Altman conspired to defraud the billionaire, who made investments within the start-up on the idea the product could be open-sourced.
“OpenAI was Sam Altman’s Trojan Horse,” Toberoff advised Fortune in a press release. “This lawsuit at its core holds Defendants accountable for their intentional misrepresentations to Elon Musk and to the public.”
In response to the preliminary swimsuit, OpenAI printed emails it mentioned have been despatched by Musk in 2018 suggesting the start-up ought to grow to be a part of Tesla, and mentioned Musk understood early on that OpenAI’s mission didn’t indicate open-sourcing.
“As we said about Elon’s initial legal filing, which was subsequently withdrawn, Elon’s prior emails continue to speak for themselves,” a spokesperson for OpenAI, advised the Washington Put up after the second swimsuit was filed.
“He basically is just not afraid of suing on any grounds,” Heminway mentioned. “I’m not saying he disregards the law, but he really does like to push the envelope on the law. He’ll listen to legal advice, and then he does what he wants, and then somebody has to clean up the mess, from a lawyering perspective afterward. And even if he loses the case, he doesn’t seem to care.”
