xAI sues Minnesota over new law targeting AI-generated nude images
Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI sued Minnesota in federal court on July 27, challenging a new state law that targets websites, apps and other services used to create realistic nude images of identifiable people.
The lawsuit was filed days before Chapter 72 took effect on August 1, 2026. The law remains in force unless a court issues an order blocking it.
What Minnesota’s law does
Chapter 72 defines “nudification” as altering or generating an image or video to depict an intimate part that was not shown in an original, unaltered image or video of an identifiable person. The result must be realistic enough that a reasonable person would believe the intimate part belongs to that person.
The law applies to a person who owns or controls a website, application, software, program or other service. Such a provider may not allow a user to access, download or use the service to nudify an image or video, and may not perform the nudification on a user’s behalf.
The statute separately prohibits advertising or promoting a service that performs those actions. It exempts a service when the user must apply substantial technical or artistic skill to create the image or video.
Private lawsuits and state penalties
A person depicted in an image or video that was nudified in violation of the law may bring a civil action in Minnesota district court. The statute allows compensatory damages, including mental anguish or suffering, of up to three times actual damages; punitive damages; injunctive relief; attorney fees and costs; and other relief ordered by the court.
The attorney general may enforce the law under Minnesota’s consumer-protection statute. Chapter 72 authorizes a civil penalty of up to $500,000 for each unlawful access, download or use. That is a maximum penalty, not an automatic $500,000 charge in every case.
Civil penalties must be deposited in the state general fund. The law provides for the accumulated balance to be appropriated for grants supporting organizations that provide direct services and advocacy for victims of sexual assault, general crime, domestic violence and child abuse.
What xAI is challenging
In its lawsuit, xAI argues that the statute is overbroad and restricts constitutionally protected speech and visual expression. The company says the law could reach images created with the consent of the person depicted, including images created by that person.
xAI also argues that the law lacks a safe harbor for companies that make good-faith efforts to prevent prohibited images. The company separately challenges the breadth of the statute’s definition of an intimate part, arguing that it could cover body parts routinely shown in public.
Those are allegations in xAI’s lawsuit, not findings by the court. The case has not established that xAI violated Minnesota law, and there is no verified order blocking or upholding Chapter 72.
Why the case matters in Minnesota
The dispute places legal responsibility on providers of AI image tools, not only on people who request or distribute unlawful images. Depending on later court rulings, companies could restrict Minnesota access, change how image tools operate, add technical safeguards or challenge particular enforcement provisions.
For Minnesota residents, the law creates a new route to seek damages and court orders when they are depicted in covered images. It also gives the attorney general a public-enforcement role. The statute applies to causes of action accruing on or after August 1, 2026.
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison told The Associated Press that his office had not yet been served with or reviewed the lawsuit at the time of the report. He said using AI to generate nude images of people against their will can cause serious emotional, personal and professional harm.
Chapter 72 also says it does not alter federal protections or liabilities under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and must be construed consistently with federal law.
What happens next
The federal case will address whether Minnesota’s restrictions can survive constitutional challenges involving speech, expression and the scope of state regulation of AI services. The parties may also seek preliminary relief while the case proceeds, but no such relief is established in the sources reviewed for this article.
Until a federal judge orders otherwise, Chapter 72 remains effective statewide. The lawsuit challenges the law’s reach; it does not by itself suspend the law’s protections or enforcement authority.
Sources
- Minnesota Chapter 72, H.F. 1606
- Associated Press: xAI challenges Minnesota's ban on AI nudification technology
- FOX 9 Minnesota: xAI sues Minnesota over nudification law
Discover more from Interactive News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
