Judge Rejects Attempt To Dismiss X’s Lawsuit Against Media Matters

Judge Rejects Attempt To Dismiss Elon Musk's Lawsuit Against Media Matters

A federal judge has rejected Media Matters’ motion to dismiss Elon Musk’s defamation lawsuit, setting the stage for a high-profile trial in 2025.

At a Glance

Judge Reed O’Connor ruled that X (formerly Twitter) “properly pled its claim” against Media Matters
The lawsuit alleges Media Matters “knowingly and maliciously manufactured” misleading content about X
Major advertisers pulled ads from X following Media Matters’ report
The trial is scheduled to begin on April 7, 2025
Judge O’Connor’s impartiality has been questioned due to his Tesla stock ownership

Lawsuit Moves Forward as Judge Denies Dismissal

U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor has declined to dismiss a defamation lawsuit filed by Elon Musk’s X against Media Matters for America. The decision, in which O’Connor said X “properly pled its claim,” allows the case to proceed to trial, marking a significant development in the ongoing legal battle between the social media platform and the media watchdog group.

The lawsuit, filed in November, claims that Media Matters “knowingly and maliciously manufactured side-by-side images depicting advertisers’ posts” next to content from white nationalists and neo-Nazis on X. The lawsuit also alleges that Media Matters portrayed the situation as though those images were what most users see on the social media platform. Reporting from the group is alleged to have led to several major advertisers, including Apple, Disney, and IBM, pulling their ads from the platform.

Libel lawsuit brought by Elon Musk's X against Media Matters will proceed to trial after judge denies motion to dismiss https://t.co/ynrq6y2KIQ

— NEWSMAX (@NEWSMAX) August 30, 2024

X Seeks Injunction and Damages

X is seeking an injunction to remove the article published by Media Matters and damages for lost advertisers and revenue. The company claims that “Nothing in Media Matters’ campaign was coincidental or accidental,” suggesting a deliberate attempt to harm X’s reputation and business relationships.

In response to the lawsuit last year, Media Matters president Angelo Carusone called it “frivolous” and an attempt to silence critics. Carusone accused Musk of encouraging Republican state attorneys general to harass critics and stifle reporting about X.

Questions of Jurisdiction and Judicial Impartiality

The choice of venue for the lawsuit has raised eyebrows among legal experts. Media Matters argued that the case should not be in Texas, as the statements were made in Maryland and published in Washington, D.C., while X is based in California.

Adding to the complexity of the case, Judge O’Connor’s impartiality has been questioned due to his ownership of Tesla stock. Financial disclosures show that O’Connor owns up to $50,000 in Tesla stock and has profited from Unilever, both of which could be seen as potential conflicts of interest. O’Connor recently recused himself from a case Musk brought against advertisers following these reports. However, he rejected a motion to recuse himself from the Media Matters case.

As the case moves forward, with the trial set to begin in April 2025, it will likely continue to draw attention from media observers. The outcome could have significant implications for the relationship between social media platforms, advertisers, and media watchdog organizations, as well as the broader landscape of online content moderation and accountability.