Start free trial

TRUE, BUTTemporary As Permanent

Constitutionality is undecided

The judge who ruled against xAI wrote, in the same order, that he hasn't decided yet whether the law is even constitutional.

“Headlines report that Elon Musk's xAI 'lost' its bid to block Minnesota's AI-nudification law after U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied its request for a preliminary injunction on September 4, 2026.”

Coverage of the ruling (allrisenews.com, thenews.com.pk, et al.); the judge's own order reaches no First Amendment merits decision, 4 September 2026

Recorded 7 September 2026. Our ruling means: literally true, materially misleading.

Read the story →

Receipts pack

The evidence file for this verdict

7 receipts: 2 support the claim, 0 contradict it, 5 add context. 3 figures on the record, 1 traced to a quoted receipt.

The receipts

Each source, the line we quote from it, its date and which way it cuts. Free to read and to cite.

  1. 1Supports the claimallrisenews.com ↗

    In the future, the Court may also consider whether xAI is entitled to permanent injunctive relief on the merits," he wrote. "Until then, because xAI has not demonstrated irreparable harm and the balance of harms tips steeply in favor of the State, xAI's motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

  2. 2Supports the claimallrisenews.com ↗

    Judge Frank found that his ultimate determination on the First Amendment issues would come later, but the “balance of the equities” meant protecting victims by allowing the law to remain in force as litigation continues.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

  3. 3Contextallrisenews.com ↗

    Certain free-speech groups — including the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota and the Foundation on Individual Rights and Expression — believed that some of the language in the law went too far.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

  4. 4Contextthenews.com.pk ↗

    Lawyers for Elon Musk's xAI filed suit against Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, arguing that the statute is overly broad, infringes upon First Amendment protections for protected speech, satire, and creative expression, and places an unfair liability burden on platform developers rather than solely prosecuting bad-actor users.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

  5. 5Contextmprnews.org ↗

    A federal judge in St. Paul on Friday denied an emergency request to block a Minnesota law banning artificial intelligence technology that can depict a person naked without their permission.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

  6. 6Contextthenews.com.pk ↗

    Minnesota's legislation (House File 1606) stands as a first-of-its-kind state statute. It penalizes platforms and creators of AI tools built or marketed to digitally undress individuals or generate explicit, non-consensual deepfake imagery, empowering the state Attorney General to levy steep penalties up to $500,000 per violation.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

  7. 7Contextallrisenews.com ↗

    Judge Donovan Frank’s rejection of a preliminary injunction is also a defeat for the Trump Justice Department, which backed xAI in the litigation.

    Look up an archived copy ↗

Members' extras

What each receipt proves, and what would change our mind.

  • What each receipt above proves, in our words
  • The figures table, each number traced to the receipt that states it
  • The trick behind the claim, explained, with the guide to spotting it
  • What would change our verdict
  • Our call on the record, with its due date

The verdict, the opening and every receipt above stay free. Membership adds our analysis to the evidence file for every checked story.

First membership: 30 days free, then A$89 a year. One introductory trial per customer. Card required; renews annually until cancelled. Cancel before the trial ends to avoid the first charge.