A US District Court Judge for the Northern District of Texas has dismissed X Corp.’s lawsuit against advertisers it claimed participated in an “illegal boycott” of X, Reuters reports. X originally filed its lawsuit in 2024 in response to advertisers pulling ads from the social media platform, a decision reportedly motivated by X’s lax approach to moderating hate speech.
Judge Jane J. Boyle was not swayed by X’s claims that advertisers like Twitch, Shell, Nestlé and Lego pulling advertising amounted to an “antitrust injury.” The companies named in X’s lawsuit are members of the World Federation of Advertisers’ Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), an organization used by advertisers to bargain for certain safety standards from the platforms they advertise on. Advertisers took issue with X’s approach to moderation and responded accordingly, purchasing ad space on other social platforms instead. The decision hurt X’s ad revenue, but as Boyle writes in the dismissal, the company made no claim that advertisers did so to benefit a competitor or to form their own competing platform. They also didn’t prevent X from selling ad space to other companies not in GARM. “The very nature of the alleged conspiracy does not state an antitrust claim,” Boyle writes, “and the Court therefore has no qualm dismissing with prejudice.”
X’s lawsuit being “dismissed with prejudice” means the company will be unable to refile the lawsuit at a later date. Separately, Judge Boyle also denied X the ability to appeal her decision. The company’s rancor for advertisers was apparent when owner Elon Musk compared X’s lawsuit to going to war, but the vitriol appears to be all for naught. X claimed in January 2026 that nearly all its top advertisers had returned to buying ads on the platform. As a subsidiary of xAI, the social platform is now also facing new, even more pressing issues, like its AI assistant Grok’s alleged willingness to generate sexually explicit imagery of minors.
Credit: Source link
