A federal judge has declined to block Minnesota’s ban on AI “nudification” tools while a lawsuit from Elon Musk’s xAI over the law proceeds, allowing the measure to take effect as scheduled on August 1.
What the court ordered
In a July 31 order, U.S. District Judge Donovan W. Frank denied xAI’s emergency motion for a temporary restraining order against Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who is defending the regulation. xAI had asked the court to bar enforcement of the state’s Nudification Ban, H.F. 1606, before it took effect. Frank found the timing worked against the company: xAI filed its motion on July 29, nearly three months after Minnesota’s governor signed the bill and only three days before it was due to take effect. “Such a delay in bringing the action and the motion suggests that harm is not immediate,” the judge wrote, citing a similar ruling in a separate Minnesota case, Kohls v. Ellison.
Rather than rule on the law’s constitutionality, Frank converted xAI’s emergency request into a motion for a preliminary injunction on an expedited schedule. Ellison’s office must respond by August 12, xAI can reply by August 17, and the court will hold a hearing on August 19 in St. Paul.
What the law does
Minnesota’s law, the first of its kind in the country, targets apps and services that can generate nonconsensual intimate images realistic enough that a viewer would believe they depict a real person, and sets fines of up to $500,000 per violation. xAI argues the statute is unconstitutionally overbroad, sweeping in protected speech alongside the conduct it aims to stop.
Why it matters
The case is being watched closely because it is the first direct court test of a state nudification law against a major AI company. It also lands against a backdrop of mounting scrutiny of Grok Imagine, xAI’s image and video tool, which researchers and journalists have reported was used to produce sexualized deepfakes of real people without consent, prompting complaints and inquiries in multiple jurisdictions. Minnesota’s law can now be enforced while that broader fight over its constitutionality plays out — a distinct legal track from xAI’s original suit against the state filed in late July.