Details of the ruling
On October 2, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit in St. Louis issued an order temporarily blocking Minnesota's law banning fake nude images created with artificial intelligence. The court granted an injunction requested by Elon Musk's xAI — the company is pursuing a lawsuit claiming the law violates the U.S. Constitution. The ruling means the law's enforcement is paused until the constitutional dispute is resolved — it was announced on Friday, October 2.
This state law was the first in U.S. history to ban "nudified" images created with AI — it took effect on August 1, 2026. The law prohibits website operators, software developers, and other parties from enabling users to create realistic images showing intimate body parts of an identifiable person that are not visible in their original photo.
The appellate court's decision overturned a lower-court ruling from a month earlier. In September, U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied xAI's emergency request for a stay — saying the company had not shown it would suffer irreparable harm while the law was in effect, and that it had waited too long to seek emergency relief. At that time, the law had already been in force since August 1. The higher court has now reached the opposite conclusion and frozen the law.
xAI's claim: free speech
xAI argues the law restricts free speech guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. The company says its Grok Imagine tool is equipped with "strong safeguards" against creating "nudified" or sexually explicit images of real people.
In filings submitted to the court, xAI highlighted three flaws in the law: it contains no consent element, it provides no exceptions for artistic, political, or journalistic images, and it lacks a scienter requirement — that is, a condition requiring proof that a violation was committed intentionally. The company also said the law creates the risk of civil suits seeking up to $500,000 per image in fines plus treble and punitive damages. In its court filings, xAI described this exposure as "$500,000 per image."
The company also noted that the law relies on a definition of "private parts" borrowed from the criminal statute on sexual offenses — covering the inner thigh, buttocks and breasts, as well as the primary sexual area.
Minnesota's position
The office of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison expressed disagreement with the appellate court's decision and said it would defend the law while xAI's appeal is being heard. Minnesota argues it enacted the law to combat the "enormous volume" of child sexual abuse material generated by AI products, including Grok Imagine. In the state's view, without such measures the spread of AI-generated harmful content has reached an unstoppable level.
According to the Minnesota office, the state enacted the law to combat the "enormous volume" of child sexual abuse material generated by AI products, including Grok Imagine.
The state had asked the appellate court not to block the law, but the court denied that request. At the current stage the law has lost its force — it is frozen only until a final ruling on xAI's constitutional claim.
What the injunction means
The granted injunction does not repeal the law — it only suspends its enforcement while xAI's constitutional claim is being heard. In other words, Minnesota's "nudification" ban is not in force now, but once the legal dispute concludes it could take effect again or be struck down entirely. The office of Attorney General Keith Ellison expressed disagreement with the ruling and said it would defend the law as the appellate process continues — meaning the legal battle between the parties will go on in the higher court.
Why the dispute matters
This case is becoming the constitutional test of the first state-level ban on AI-generated deepfake images. As Reuters reports, the court proceedings will help draw the line between free speech and the fight against AI-generated harmful content. As The Week notes, the law took effect amid allegations that xAI's Grok Imagine was generating child sexual abuse material.
The next step is the appellate court's ruling on the merits of xAI's constitutional claim. Until the appellate court issues a final decision, Minnesota's law will not be in force.
