Harry and Meghan blast Musk over predatory Grok AI
Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan blasted Elon Musk and Big Tech after Minnesota outlawed AI nudification tools, accusing the firm behind X's Grok of putting profit ahead of child safety by suing to stop the ban. A federal judge denied xAI's pause request, with a hearing set for Aug. 19.
Key Takeaways
- Harry and Meghan praised Minnesota's unanimous ban on AI "nudification" as bipartisan leadership for the digital age.
- Without naming him, they criticized the "trillionaire" behind X's Grok for suing to block the law.
- A federal judge denied xAI's request to pause the ban; a preliminary injunction hearing is set for Aug. 19.
- Grok's Imagine feature has faced scrutiny for enabling non-consensual sexualized deepfakes.
In an August 2026 statement on their official website, the Sussexes asked, "Can we all agree technology should not enable predators to target children?" They accused tech giants of putting profit ahead of the digital safety of women and young people.
The couple hailed Minnesota as the first U.S. state to outlaw AI nudification technology after a 65-0 Senate vote. They called the measure "an example of leadership fit for the digital age." For more on AI policy flashpoints, see our Future Tech & AI Wonders coverage.
Why did Harry and Meghan target Grok and Big Tech?
They argued xAI was "mitigating risk to their bottom line instead of aggressively responding to the clear evidence their product features are enabling predators to prey on women and children."
Grok's Imagine tool has been used to create sexualized deepfakes without consent. The couple asked whether AI can improve society while enabling "the worst in humans," and whether children should "pay the price while we wait to find out."
According to USA Today, a Musk representative did not immediately return a request for comment on Aug. 3.
What does Minnesota's nudification ban actually do?
Signed by Gov. Tim Walz in May, the law bars owners of websites, apps, or software from letting users "nudify" images of others, and bans advertising those capabilities.
It defines a nudified image as one altered or generated to depict an intimate part not in the original of an identifiable person, and so realistic that a reasonable person would believe it belongs to them. Civil penalties can reach $500,000 per unlawful access, download, or use, plus damages; there are no criminal penalties.
How is xAI's lawsuit against Minnesota unfolding?
xAI sued last week, arguing the state may curb sexualized AI content but that the statute "extends far beyond that goal" and risks free-speech violations. The company says it already bars generating nude or sexualized images of people without consent.
On July 31, U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied a temporary pause, citing xAI's late filing. NBC News reported a further hearing on whether to grant a preliminary injunction is scheduled for Aug. 19. The ACLU of Minnesota said First Amendment interests matter, but argued the final bill "does not meet the mark."
Harry and Meghan have long pressed platforms on online harm, calling digital safety a global humanitarian issue after years of advocacy for stronger moderation and youth protections.