Who is suing Elon Musk’s AI company, and why? A New York lawsuit over Grok-generated deepfakes raises urgent questions about AI safety and accountability.
 |
| A lawsuit by Ashley St. Clair against Elon Musk’s xAI could shape how courts assign liability for AI-generated sexual deepfakes. Image: CH |
Tech Desk — January 17, 2026:
Ashley St. Clair, the mother of one of Elon Musk’s children, has filed a lawsuit against Musk’s artificial intelligence company, xAI, alleging that its Grok chatbot enabled the creation and circulation of sexually exploitative deepfake images of her, according to court documents.
St. Clair, 27, a writer and political strategist based in New York City, filed the lawsuit in New York state court on Thursday. The complaint alleges that Grok generated nonconsensual, sexualized images depicting her both as a minor and as an adult. Among the images cited is a photograph of St. Clair at age 14, originally showing her fully dressed, that was digitally altered to appear as though she were wearing a bikini.
Other images allegedly portrayed her in explicit poses and included bikinis bearing swastikas. St. Clair, who is Jewish, says the images caused her humiliation, severe emotional distress, and ongoing fear for her safety.
According to the lawsuit, the deepfakes began circulating on X, the social media platform owned by Musk where Grok operates, sometime last year. St. Clair says she reported the images to X and requested their removal. She alleges that the platform initially ruled the content did not violate its policies.
While X later promised that her images would not be used or altered without her consent, St. Clair claims the platform continued to allow the fake images to circulate. She further alleges that X retaliated against her by removing her premium subscription and verification checkmark, limiting her ability to monetize her account, which has roughly 1 million followers.
“I have suffered and continue to suffer serious pain and mental distress as a result of xAI’s role in creating and distributing these digitally altered images of me,” St. Clair wrote in documents attached to the lawsuit. She said she lives in fear of individuals who have viewed or shared the deepfakes.
The lawsuit seeks an unspecified amount of damages for emotional distress and other claims, as well as court orders immediately barring xAI from generating any further deepfake images of St. Clair.
St. Clair is the mother of Musk’s 16-month-old son, Romulus. Musk does not currently have a wife, though his personal relationships have frequently attracted public attention alongside his business ventures.
In response, xAI’s attorneys moved the case to federal court in Manhattan and filed a countersuit against St. Clair in the Northern District of Texas. The countersuit alleges that St. Clair violated xAI’s user agreement, which requires lawsuits against the company to be filed in federal court in Texas, and seeks an undisclosed monetary judgment.
St. Clair’s attorney, Carrie Goldberg, criticized the countersuit, calling it a “jolting” move. She said St. Clair would challenge the jurisdictional transfer and defend her right to litigate in New York.
“Any jurisdiction will recognize the gravamen of her claims — that by manufacturing nonconsensual sexually explicit images of girls and women, xAI is a public nuisance and a not reasonably safe product,” Goldberg said.
Amid the controversy, X announced changes to its policies this week, stating that Grok would no longer allow users to edit photos to portray real people in revealing clothing where illegal. The platform also said it would restrict image creation and editing to paid accounts to improve accountability.
X reiterated its zero-tolerance policy on child sexual exploitation, nonconsensual nudity, and unwanted sexual content, saying such material would be removed immediately and reported to law enforcement when required.
xAI did not immediately respond to requests for comment. When asked about the lawsuit, the company replied in an email to The Associated Press: “Legacy Media Lies.”
The case adds to growing legal and regulatory scrutiny of generative artificial intelligence technologies, as courts and lawmakers grapple with how to address the harms posed by AI-generated deepfakes and nonconsensual sexual imagery.