Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Sunday, August 02, 2026

A federal judge has rejected X.AI's request for a temporary restraining order that would have halted enforcement of Minnesota's AI nudification ban. The bill was passed with near unanimous support in both the Minnesota House and Senate earlier this year. The law bans the use of technology that generates fake nude images of real people. X.AI challenged the law, saying the company already prohibits its users from generating nude or sexualized images of people without their consent and claims the Minnesota statute "imposes an overbroad, content-based ban on free speech and the tools of visual expression in a clumsy attempt to prohibit nudification."

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The court wrote in its opinion denying the request that "X.AI filed the motion on July 29, 2026, nearly three months after the law was signed, and only three days before the law is set to take effect. Such a delay in bringing the action and the motion suggests that harm is not immediate."

"I am extremely proud to be defending this law, and along with it, the dignity of the people of Minnesota," said Attorney General Ellison. "Minnesota's landmark law banning the use of nudification technology will go into effect tomorrow as planned. These nudification apps, including Grok Imagine, have been used to generate child sexual abuse materials and harass people in the vilest ways imaginable. That repulsive behavior is not welcome in Minnesota."

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Nude Nazis Unite!!

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2026-08-02 12:37 PM | Reply

CSAMRUNT is crushed.

#2 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2026-08-02 12:42 PM | Reply

Doesn't the UK have a suit along these same lines?

I wonder which nations will ban X first?

#3 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2026-08-02 03:06 PM | Reply

Any smart ones

#4 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2026-08-02 06:43 PM | Reply

How does fake kiddie porn " Victimize" anyone?

If it's AI generated?

Doesn't prosecution of the possession of Fake images really Amount to Thoughtcrime?

Are we really going there?

If real people are being hurt to produce it that's one thing.

But just spanking to fake kiddie pictures?

Not a Crime....

It probably PREVENTS actual child abuse.

They can Fantasize without hurting real Kids?

It's not like Pedophiles are going anywhere.

Our Dear Leader is Spanking Away.

With Actual Kids.

#5 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-08-02 06:54 PM | Reply

let's say it's a real kid, AI'd in to a fake porn situation, and shared around the school. That could do some real harm.

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-08-02 07:03 PM | Reply

That's not totally fake.

It's a hybrid of real and fake.

That scenario would be Chargeable because of the presence of an actual person's image.

Totally fake images are another thing altogether.

At least pretend To Argue in Good faith.

Nobody said anything about a real kid's face on an AI Torso.

I'm saying COMPLETELY Fake images for Private Use, Are not Chargeable because prosecution of such images amounts to Thoughtcrime.

Which is absurd Tyranny.

#7 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2026-08-02 07:16 PM | Reply

"That's not totally fake."

Neither is the source material for AI Generated Kiddie Porn.

#8 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-08-03 09:28 AM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort