# Federal Judge Denies Elon Musk Firm xAI Bid To Block Minnesota Nudify Ban in Second Legal Defeat > Source: > Published: 2026-09-08 12:30:28+00:00 # Federal Judge Denies Elon Musk Firm xAI Bid To Block Minnesota Nudify Ban in Second Legal Defeat ## A federal judge has denied xAI's bid to block Minnesota's AI nudification ban, allowing the law to remain in effect while the company's First Amendment challenge proceeds A federal judge has rejected xAI's second bid to block Minnesota's AI nudification ban, leaving the first-of-its-kind state law in force while the company's First Amendment challenge continues. US District Judge Donovan Frank ruled on 4 September 2026 that xAI had failed to demonstrate it would suffer irreparable harm if the law remained enforceable during the litigation. The legal battle unfolded after Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison defended the legislation in court, arguing that xAI's lawsuit was misguided and unlikely to succeed. ## The Legal Battle Unfolds The law, which took effect on 1 August, prohibits operators of websites, applications, software and other services from allowing users to use their technology to 'nudify' images or videos of identifiable people, or from doing so on a user's behalf. The statute defines 'nudify' as altering or generating an image to depict an intimate part, including the primary genital area, groin, inner thigh, buttocks or breast, that was not depicted in the original unaltered image or video of an identifiable individual, where the result is sufficiently realistic that a reasonable person would believe the intimate part belongs to that individual. Violations can draw a civil penalty of up to $500,000 for each violation, enforceable by the attorney general. Fearing these punishments, xAI filed a lawsuit against the state in July, claiming the law is an overbroad, content-based restriction on free speech. [xAI has described the law as an overbroad, content-based restriction](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/elon-musk-xai-literally-chose-profit-predators-appetite-abuse-content-lawsuit-alleges-1816994) that it calls a 'clumsy' attempt to prohibit nudification. It noted that a business whose users generated 100,000 of these images would be charged $50 billion. Frank denied a motion from xAI on 31 July that would have stopped the law from taking effect. On 4 September, the judge denied a second motion, ruling that xAI failed to show it would suffer harm while pursuing its lawsuit. 'Because xAI has not demonstrated irreparable harm and the balance of harms tips steeply in favour of the State, xAI's motion for a preliminary injunction is denied,' Frank wrote. ## First Amendment Concerns Raised xAI argued that the law violates the First Amendment and could count AI generations of shirtless men, harmless AI generations in swimwear, and satirical images as deepfakes. xAI argued that the law could potentially encompass an AI-generated image of Illinois Gov JB Pritzker and former New Jersey Gov Chris Christie depicted as sumo wrestlers. The company also argued that the law could sweep in benign or humorous images, including depictions of shirtless men, people in swimwear and competitive swimmers. [Grok has faced scrutiny over the generation of sexualised and non-consensual images](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/elon-musk-xai-lawsuit-child-abuse-material-ai-training-1816900), including allegations involving images of children. The court record cites evidence presented to Minnesota lawmakers that an AI image tool generated about 3 million sexualised images in its first 11 days, including roughly 23,000 depicting children. According to figures cited by xAI in court, the company suspended 52,222 accounts and made 73,604 reports to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) in 2026, which it said resulted in at least 244 arrests. xAI emphasises that it strictly prohibits its users from generating nude or sexualised images of people without their consent. Because the judge denied the preliminary injunction, the law remains enforceable while xAI's lawsuit continues, including its provision allowing the attorney general to seek civil penalties of up to $500,000 per violation. Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison can seek civil penalties against technology companies that enable the creation of AI-generated nude images of real people in violation of the new state law. Judge Frank's order said xAI failed to show it would suffer harm while it pursues a lawsuit alleging the new law violates the Constitution's First Amendment by restricting protected expressive activity. The State has enacted, democratically and nearly unanimously, a civil statute aimed at protecting the public from the undisputed harm stemming from AI-nudification technology and the resulting proliferation of photorealistic sexualised images. When comparing the State's interests with any potential harm to xAI, the Court finds without hesitation that the balance of the equities weighs heavily in the State's favour. The ruling leaves the law in effect while [xAI's First Amendment challenge](https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/elon-musk-x-corp-legal-defeat-stop-hiding-hate-act-1816977) continues. © Copyright IBTimes 2026. All rights reserved.