Judge Smacks Down Elon Musk’s Lawsuit Against Anti-Hate Research Group: Only About ‘Punishing’ Their ‘Speech’
Elon Musk’s lawsuit against the Center for Countering Digital Hate was tossed out by a judge on Monday who slammed Musk’s attempt at “punishing the Defendants for their speech.”
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer pulled no punches in going after Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” over his efforts to sue a watchdog that called out X, formerly known as Twitter, for being a “toxic” haven for hate speech.
Musk quickly laid off staff and dismantled many of the content moderation protocols in place at Twitter after he bought the company for an astounding $44 billion. The Center for Countering Digital Hate tracked the proliferation of hate speech on X and released a report last year noting Musk had allowed back onto the platform many once suspended “neo-Nazis, white supremacists, misogynists and spreaders of dangerous conspiracy theories.”
Musk sued the Center for Countering Digital Hate seeking millions in damages to make up for lost advertising that he blamed on the watchdog’s report, which was widely cited in the media. The Associated Press reported in February:
In its suit, filed in the Northern District of California, San Francisco-based X alleges that the center’s researchers improperly collected a vast amount of data for its analysis, using third-party software to “scrape” the site. Such actions violated the terms of service that all users agree to, said Jon Hawk, an attorney for X.
Musk also sued the progressive media watchdog Media Matters For America after the group published a report that ads from major companies were appearing alongside pro-Nazi content. The Media Matters report led to a major boycott of the platform by advertisers last November, including from companies like Disney, NBCUniversal, and IBM.
Judge Breyer called Musk’s suit “so unabashedly and vociferously about one thing that there can be no mistaking that purpose. This case is about punishing the Defendants for their speech.”
Breyer ruled that Musk’s suit violates a California law that bans “strategic lawsuits against public participation,” or SLAPP.
“X Corp.’s motivation in bringing this case is evident. X Corp. has brought this case in order to punish CCDH for CCDH publications that criticized X Corp. — and perhaps in order to dissuade others who might wish to engage in such criticism,” Breyer ruled, adding:
Although X Corp. accuses CCDH of trying “to censor viewpoints that CCDH disagrees with,” it is X Corp. that demands “at least tens of millions of dollars” in damages — presumably enough to torpedo the operations of a small nonprofit — because of the views expressed in the nonprofit’s publications.
If CCDH’s publications were defamatory, that would be one thing, but X Corp. has carefully avoided saying that they are.
CCDH called the ruling, “A huge win for everyone working to hold social media giants to account.”
“We’ll continue to expose hate & lies wherever we see them and to stand for independent research,” the group added in a statement on X.
