On Monday, the US Supreme Court rejected Elon Musk’s appeal of the SEC’s 2018 settlement. the infamous “funded” tweet. Ars Technica reports The conservative majority adjourned the trial weigh Should U.S. presidents be above the law to accept Musk’s payment of fines, his resignation from Tesla’s board, and an attempt to overturn an agreement that requires his tweets to be pre-vetted by a lawyer?
The judges denied Musk’s petition without comment. Their reluctance to accept the billionaire’s appeal remains intact decision of the appellate court overturned claims of victimization by the Tesla founder a year ago.
The saga began in 2018 with Musk he tweeted, “I’m thinking of taking Tesla private for $420. Funding has been secured.” He also said, “Investor support confirmed. The only reason it’s not certain is because it depends on a shareholder vote.” Tesla shares rose more than six percent.
There was only one small problem: the financial security was not provided, and the SEC admits false statements that seriously affect investors. The SEC said it was aware that “Musk did not discuss key contract terms, including price, with any potential financing source, even less approved,” and “did not satisfy many additional contingencies.” The government agency claimed the move caused “significant confusion and disruption in Tesla’s stock market.”
The The SEC settlement hit his wallet hard, requiring Musk and Tesla to each pay $20 million in fines. He also had to resign as chairman of the board at the automaker and have Tesla’s lawyer vet any tweets about the investor before posting. Of course, after Musk Twitter took over and changed his name to X. But at least so it’s going great!
The settlement forced him to “waive his First Amendment right to speak on matters that go far beyond the alleged violations,” the petition said. Musk, who is currently there is With an estimated net worth of $185 billion, he claimed he was the victim of “economic duress” in agreeing to the deal, describing it as a tactic to “brainwash and harass” him and his company.
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, whose decision will now be the final word on the matter, rejected Musk’s arguments. “Parties who enter into consent decrees may voluntarily waive their First Amendment and other rights,” they said. The appeals court “saw no evidence to support Musk’s claim that the SEC’s consent decree used his protected speech to conduct malicious, stalking investigations.”
