Supreme Court Rejects Musk Twitter Sitter Appeal In Sec Wi
BloombergApr 29
SCOTUS Rejects Musk's Challenge to SEC Agreement
Image copyright: Taylor Hill/Contributor/Getty Images Entertainment via Getty Images
The Facts
The US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on Monday rejected Elon Musk's appeal against a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that mandated that he receive prior approval for Tesla-related tweets.
Musk had challenged the settlement's constitutionality, arguing that restrictions on his social media posts and Tesla-related public communications would violate his First Amendment rights.
The Spin
Establishment-critical narrative
The SEC is unfairly policing Musk's speech and violating his First Amendment rights. The so-called "Twitter Sitter" clause unfairly inhibits his speech by threatening penalties for posting unapproved statements even if his words are true. Although Musk originally agreed to the provision in the settlement, the terms are unconstitutional, and the SEC has since misused it to limit Musk's freedom.
Pro-establishment narrative
There's no evidence to support Musk's claims that the SEC has improperly used its previous agreement with Musk to unfairly police his speech. Musk made false and misleading claims on social media that led to market disruption, and he agreed to a settlement to take responsibility for his mistake. The "Twitter Sitter" provision was put in place to ensure the same situation doesn't happen again and the deal should be honored.
Nerd narrative
There's a 66% chance that Elon Musk will face US federal criminal charges or an SEC civil complaint before 2026, according to the Metaculus prediction community.