Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company xAI has taken its legal challenge against Minnesota’s AI “nudification” law to a federal appeals court after a district judge refused to stop enforcement of the measure.
The company is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to block Minnesota from enforcing the law while its broader constitutional challenge continues. The appeal follows a September 4 ruling in which U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied xAI’s request for a preliminary injunction.
Minnesota’s law, known as HF 1606, took effect on August 1, 2026. It prohibits companies from allowing users to use websites, applications, software or other services to create certain realistic AI-generated images that make it appear an identifiable person has exposed an intimate body part that was not visible in the original image.
The case is being closely watched because it tests how far a state can go in regulating AI tools capable of creating nonconsensual sexual imagery while also dealing with claims that such restrictions interfere with constitutionally protected expression.
Minnesota’s AI Nudification Law Took Effect in August
Minnesota lawmakers passed HF 1606 in response to the growing use of AI tools to create realistic sexual images of people without their consent.
The law defines “nudify” as changing an image or video to show an intimate body part that was not visible in the original. The altered image must be realistic enough that a reasonable person could believe the body part belongs to an identifiable person.
The law puts restrictions on companies that provide these services. Website, app and software operators cannot allow users to access, download or use their services to create these images. They are also prohibited from using their own technology to create a nudified image or video for a user.
People who are harmed by a violation can also take legal action. They may seek compensation for damages, including mental anguish and suffering. The law also allows courts to award punitive damages, issue orders to stop the conduct and require the responsible party to cover legal costs.
Minnesota’s attorney general can enforce the law under the state’s consumer protection laws. The law therefore targets the companies and services that provide AI nudification tools, rather than relying only on cases against individuals who create or share the images.
ALSO READ: California Tightens Rules for AI Companion Apps as Virtual Relationships Grow
xAI Says the Law Violates the First Amendment
xAI sued Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison in federal court, arguing that HF 1606 violates the First Amendment.
The company says the law places too many restrictions on AI tools that can create and edit images. xAI argues that some AI-generated images may be protected as a form of expression and that the law could cover more than clearly unlawful sexual images created without a person’s consent.
These are xAI’s arguments in the case. The court has not issued a final decision saying that Minnesota’s law violates the First Amendment.
Minnesota has rejected xAI’s position. The attorney general’s office argues that the law targets the harmful use of AI to create realistic sexual images of identifiable people. It also argues that xAI has not met the legal requirements needed to block enforcement of the law.
Grok Imagine and the Dispute Over AI Nudification
The legal dispute is closely linked to Grok Imagine, xAI’s tool for creating and editing images. In its September ruling, the federal court referred to Grok Imagine as an example of the type of AI technology covered by Minnesota’s law.
The case focuses on whether companies that provide AI tools capable of creating certain sexual images or revealing intimate body parts can be restricted under the law. xAI told the court that Grok has safeguards to prevent users from creating nonconsensual nude or sexual images of real people.
The company also says its rules prohibit this type of content and that it has added technical measures to stop users from generating such images. Reuters reported that xAI made similar arguments in its appeal to the Eighth Circuit.
Minnesota, however, argues that having platform rules and safety measures does not prevent the state from regulating how the technology itself can be used.
ALSO READ: Teen Use of AI Girlfriends and Companion Bots Raises New Safety Concerns
xAI First Asked the Court to Stop the Law
xAI first asked the court to temporarily stop Minnesota from enforcing the law before it took effect. On July 31, 2026, Judge Frank rejected xAI’s request for an emergency temporary restraining order (TRO). The decision came just one day before the law was scheduled to take effect on August 1.
xAI then asked for a broader preliminary injunction. This would have stopped Minnesota from enforcing the law while the company’s constitutional challenge moved through the courts. The judge rejected that request on September 4, 2026.
The decision did not end xAI’s lawsuit. It means the law remains in effect while the court continues to consider xAI’s constitutional challenge.
Why the Judge Refused to Block Minnesota’s AI Law
Judge Frank’s decision focused partly on whether xAI had shown that the Minnesota law would cause irreparable harm, which is an important requirement for getting a preliminary injunction. The judge found that xAI had not provided enough evidence to meet that requirement.
The timing of the lawsuit was also important. Minnesota had signed the law several months before xAI filed its challenge. Judge Frank noted that if xAI believed the law would cause immediate and serious harm, the company could have taken legal action earlier.
The ruling was about whether xAI had met the requirements for temporary court relief. It was not a final decision on whether Minnesota’s law is constitutional.
Judge Frank said the constitutional issues in the case are complex, especially because they involve new AI technology and the potential risks associated with its use. He indicated that those issues would be examined more fully as the lawsuit continues.
xAI Disputes the Judge’s Finding About Delay
In its appeal, xAI challenged the district court’s view that the company waited too long to ask for legal relief. xAI argued that large companies can take more time to make legal and business decisions because several executives and other decision-makers may need to be involved.
The company says the timing of its lawsuit should not be taken as proof that it was not facing immediate harm. xAI is now asking the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals to step in while the main constitutional case continues.
xAI Asks the Eighth Circuit to Block Enforcement
The appeal was filed in the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals under X.AI LLC v. Keith Ellison, Case No. 26-2806. The case was filed on September 9, 2026. Two days later, xAI asked the court for an injunction pending appeal.
If granted, the injunction would temporarily stop Minnesota from enforcing the law against xAI while the appeal moves forward. This request is separate from the larger question of whether HF 1606 is constitutional. xAI is asking for temporary protection while the appeals court reviews the case. Reuters reported that xAI’s filing asks the Eighth Circuit to stop Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison from enforcing the law.
Minnesota Says xAI Has Not Shown Immediate Harm
Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s office has opposed xAI’s requests for emergency relief. The state argues that xAI has not shown the irreparable harm needed to justify a preliminary injunction.
It also argues that xAI is unlikely to succeed with its First Amendment claims at this stage of the case. After the September 4 ruling, Ellison’s office said the decision allowed Minnesota’s anti-nudification law to remain in effect.
The First Amendment Question Remains Unresolved
The main constitutional question is whether Minnesota’s law places restrictions on speech that is protected by the First Amendment. xAI argues that creating and editing AI images can be a form of expression. The company also says the law is broad enough to affect legal uses of AI image-generation technology.
Minnesota takes a different position. The state says the law is aimed at creating realistic sexual images of identifiable people without their consent, rather than normal artistic, political or other protected forms of expression.
The district court has not made a final decision on this constitutional question. Judge Frank said the issues are complicated because courts are applying existing constitutional rules to relatively new AI technology and its potential harms.
This distinction is important as the September ruling did not decide whether Minnesota’s AI nudification law violates the First Amendment. The constitutional question remains part of the ongoing case.
The Case Is Now Moving Through the Appeals Court
The appeal is now moving forward in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court has assigned the case number 26-2806. xAI filed its request for an injunction pending appeal on September 11, 2026. The current court schedule gives xAI until October 29, 2026, to file its opening brief.
As of September 20, 2026, the Eighth Circuit had not ruled on xAI’s request to temporarily stop enforcement of the law. For now, Minnesota’s law remains in effect while the appeal and the larger constitutional case continue.