In December, Elon Musk petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn a settlement he had reached with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2018. Musk argued that the legal requirement to have a “Twitter sitter,” which mandated that he seek approval for any posts about Tesla, infringed upon his free speech rights. However, the court dismissed his claim and declined to take up the case without providing a reason for their decision.
Musk has had a history of public disputes with government agencies, including openly criticizing the SEC and making disparaging remarks about President Joe Biden. Recently, the SEC launched a new investigation into Tesla’s self-driving technology, which has faced scrutiny from regulators following several accidents. Musk’s contentious relationship with regulatory authorities highlights the ongoing challenges faced by his companies in navigating legal and regulatory landscapes.
The Supreme Court has rejected Elon Musk’s appeal to remove his “Twitter sitter,” a legal requirement stemming from an agreement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) which mandates that he seek approval for any posts about Tesla. Musk argued that this requirement infringed upon his free speech rights, but the court dismissed his claim. It is unclear if Musk will continue to pursue legal action in this matter or if he will accept the Supreme Court’s ruling.