Appeals Court Pauses Minnesota’s AI Fake-Nude Ban as xAI Challenges Its Constitutionality
The injunction interrupts a law aimed at companies enabling realistic fake nudity. Minnesota cites child-abuse risks; xAI argues the measure restricts protected speech.
Listen to this story
The audio brief
Story brief
3 key pointsThe Eighth Circuit’s October 2 injunction temporarily blocks Minnesota from enforcing its AI “nudification” restriction against services while xAI’s constitutional challenge proceeds. The law, effective August 1, reaches website operators and software developers that enable users to generate realistic intimate images of identifiable people, not just the people entering prompts. The appeals court reversed the immediate outcome after a district judge denied emergency relief; it has not decided whether the restriction violates protected-speech rights, leaving providers’ legal exposure unsettled.
- 01
U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied xAI’s earlier emergency request, citing insufficient evidence of irreparable harm and delay in seeking relief.
- 02
Minnesota says the restriction is intended to combat AI-generated child sexual abuse material, including material associated with tools such as Grok Imagine.
- 03
xAI told the appeals court that Grok Imagine has “rigorous protections” against creating sexualized images of real people; the claim was not independently assessed.
Minnesota’s restrictions on AI-generated fake nude images are on hold after the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted xAI an injunction on October 2, 2026. The order gives the company the temporary relief a lower court denied last month, while its lawsuit alleging that the law is unconstitutional continues.
The restriction reaches the companies supplying the tools
Minnesota’s anti-“nudification” law took effect on August 1. It prohibits website operators, software developers and others from allowing users to create realistic images showing an intimate body part absent from an original photograph of an identifiable person. The provision targets the services that enable the transformation, rather than describing a restriction solely on the person entering a prompt.
The earlier denial turned on harm and timing
U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank rejected emergency relief after finding that xAI had not shown it would suffer irreparable harm while contesting the law. He also found that the company had waited too long to seek an emergency order.
Speech protections and abuse prevention remain in conflict
- xAI’s constitutional argument: The company alleges that Minnesota’s measure restricts speech protected by the U.S. Constitution.
- Minnesota’s stated purpose: The state says it adopted the law to combat the spread of child sexual abuse material generated by AI products such as Grok Imagine.
- xAI’s safeguards claim: In its appeal, the company said Grok Imagine includes “rigorous protections” against creating nudified or sexualized images of real people. That describes the company’s position on its controls, not an independent assessment of their effectiveness.
Neither Minnesota nor xAI immediately responded to Reuters’ requests for comment. The next substantive question in the continuing case is the validity of the restriction itself: whether Minnesota’s effort to prevent this form of image generation can stand against xAI’s protected-speech challenge.
Sources
- marketscreener.comUS appeals court blocks Minnesota's AI 'nudification' law for now in XAI lawsuit
- straitstimes.comUS appeals court blocks Minnesota law barring ‘nudified’ photos in xAI lawsuit
Reader comments
Newest comments first. Replies stay oldest first.