xAI Sues Minnesota Attorney General to Block First-of-its-Kind AI 'Nudification' Law

xAI, Elon Musk's AI company, filed a federal lawsuit Monday against Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison to block the country's first law targeting AI "nudification"—software that uses artificial intelligence to digitally remove or alter clothing in real photos of real people—calling it "an overbroad, content-based ban on free speech and the tools of visual expression in a clumsy attempt to prohibit nudification."

The law is HF 1606. It makes any platform strictly liable—legally responsible regardless of knowledge or intent—if users generate realistic images of real people showing body parts those people never exposed. Each violation can cost up to $500,000, per image generated.

The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, isn't defending nudification exactly. "xAI accordingly does not contest Minnesota's interest in prohibiting the dissemination of artificially generated nude images of real people without their consent," the filing states. "But the statute Minnesota enacted extends far beyond that goal, exposing a wide array of protected speech to civil liability and government sanctions."

The problem, xAI alleges, is how Minnesota defined the term. Per the lawsuit, the state borrowed "intimate part" from a criminal sexual contact statute—one written for nonconsensual touching, not image generation. Under it, the inner thigh, buttocks, or breast all qualify equally. Generating a realistic AI image of a shirtless politician, a woman in a swimsuit, or a public figure at the beach—even for political satire—could trigger the law and the fine.

And there's no escape for platforms, per xAI’s arguments. "There is no safe harbor for good-faith efforts of the provider of general-purpose AI creative tools to avoid harms," the complaint reads. "Liability attaches even if the depicted persons consented—or created the image themselves—and even if the image is never shared."

There's also no scienter (knowledge of wrongdoing) requirement—a user sneaking past a company's own filters still makes the company fully liable under this law.

In 2026 alone the company suspended more than 50,000 accounts and filed more than 70,000 reports to NCMEC (the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children), leading to at least 244 arrests. None of that creates a defense under HF 1606.

The broader context matters here. Grok's image tools ran into trouble almost immediately after their late July 2025 launch, generating deepfakes—AI-generated synthetic images of real people—with simple text prompts, prompting regulatory probes across Europe, Australia, and multiple US states. Cities like Baltimore and three Tennessee minors separately sued xAI over Grok's deepfake outputs. The company also challenged Colorado's AI law in April on similar First Amendment grounds.

Minnesota passed HF 1606 132-1 in the House and 65-0 in the Senate, after a man used social media photos to generate sexual images of more than 80 women he knew. The bill's champion in the Senate, Senator Erin Maye Quade, confirmed the law's prohibition on consensual images was "intentional."

The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act—signed by President Donald Trump in May 2025—already covers nonconsensual intimate deepfakes, but requires proof of nonconsent and actual distribution, uses a narrower body-part definition, and includes carve-outs for education and medical content. xAI argues that's the model Minnesota should have adopted.

AG Ellison isn't backing down. "AI nudification robs the target of their dignity and can cause immense harm on an emotional, personal, and professional level," he said after the lawsuit was filed.

HF 1606 takes effect Saturday. xAI wants a federal judge to stop it before then.