Federal judge refuses to throw out Elon Musk and X ‘thermonuclear’ Media Matters lawsuit

The progressive organization Media Matters for America has failed in its attempt to dismiss a lawsuit brought against it by X Corp., formerly known as Twitter, and its owner Elon Musk.

Progressive Group Faces Legal Battle Over Alleged Harm to X Corp’s Business

The lawsuit, which accuses Media Matters of business disparagement and tortious interference, will now move closer to trial, scheduled for April of next year. In a recent 16-page ruling, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor of the Northern District of Texas rejected Media Matters’ motion to dismiss the case. O’Connor, a George W. Bush appointee who has previously ruled in Musk’s favor and reportedly owns Tesla stock, determined that Media Matters, along with its president Angelo Carusone and reporter Eric Hananoki, must face allegations that they intentionally harmed X’s business by publishing a report that suggested the social media platform was placing major brands’ advertisements next to content promoting Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party.

Lawsuit Alleges Intentional Harm to X Corp

X Corp.’s lawsuit contends that Media Matters engaged in a “blatant smear campaign” aimed at damaging the company financially. The suit alleges that Media Matters “knowingly and maliciously manufactured” images showing advertisers’ posts on X’s platform adjacent to Neo-Nazi and white nationalist content. According to X, these images were then falsely presented as typical user experiences on the platform, leading to potential harm to its business relationships and revenue.

The lawsuit brings forth claims of interference with contract, business disparagement, and interference with prospective economic advantage. X argues that the article published by Media Matters was intended to spark an exodus of advertisers from the platform following Musk’s acquisition of the company.

Media Matters attempted to dismiss the case by challenging the venue and jurisdiction, arguing that the allegedly defamatory statements were created in Maryland, published in Washington, D.C. and that X is headquartered in California. They also accused X of “judge-shopping” by filing the case in Texas. However, Judge O’Connor dismissed these arguments, stating that X had provided sufficient evidence to survive the motion to dismiss and that the claims of tortious interference with contracts were adequately pled.

Judge O’Connor’s Ruling Sets Stage for Trial

In his ruling, Judge O’Connor wrote that X had made sufficient allegations regarding the existence of contracts subject to interference, intentional acts of interference, and proximate causation. He emphasized that it is clear X had named parties who had contracted for paid advertisements on its platform and that Media Matters’ reporting had acknowledged the existence of these contracts. “Because the Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants, the venue is proper, and Plaintiff has properly pled its claims, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED,” O’Connor concluded.

With the motion to dismiss denied, the lawsuit is now set to proceed to trial, where Media Matters will face the accusations in court. This case is one of several legal battles Musk is engaged in as he seeks to defend his company’s reputation and business interests. The outcome could have significant implications for both parties and the broader media landscape.