Twenty-seven-year-old conservative influencer Ashley St Clair has been a long-time darling of the MAGA world. In her early twenties, she dropped out of faculty and have become an outspoken proponent of right-wing causes, together with anti-transgender activism. 5 years later, she had a toddler with Elon Musk—a person she’s presently battling in a New York federal courtroom.
Earlier this month, St Clair filed a lawsuit in opposition to Musk’s AI firm in response to a flood of deepfakes made by xAI’s chatbot Grok and shared on X, the social media platform Musk owns. She advised Fortune earlier in January that X customers have been turning photos on her X profile into sexualized AI-generated photos of her, together with some she mentioned depicted her as a minor.
“There were pictures of me with nothing covering me except a piece of floss with my toddler’s backpack in the background and photos of me where it looks like I’m not wearing a top at all,” she mentioned. “I felt so disgusted and violated.”
The dispute between St Clair and X is only one a part of a wider wave of concern and backlash after xAI’s Grok AI mannequin was used for a widespread, non-consensual “digital undressing” marketing campaign that started in late December. Many customers found they may tag Grok on the X platform and ask it to edit photos from customers’ profiles. In response to analysis from the Middle for Countering Digital Hate, over a span of 11 days—from December 29, 2025, by January 8, 2026—Grok generated roughly 3 million sexualized photos.
Within the swimsuit, St Clair, who’s Jewish, additionally claims the AI chatbot generated a picture that put her “in a string bikini lined with swastikas.” The extra St Clair spoke out in regards to the subject, she mentioned, the extra she was focused with the pictures.
The authorized combat acquired disagreeable rapidly. After being notified of the motion, Musk’s firm virtually instantly counter-sued the conservative influencer, accusing her of violating the platform’s phrases of service, which state any disputes with X have to be introduced in Texas. Representatives for Musk didn’t reply to particular questions from Fortune.
Musk has usually most popular to combat his authorized battles in Texas. In 2024, X up to date its phrases of service to require that each one federal lawsuits in opposition to the corporate be filed within the Northern District of Texas, regardless of its headquarters being in Bastrop, which falls beneath the Western District of Texas.
Musk and the corporate haven’t acknowledged their causes for that stipulation. However 10 of the Northern District’s 11 energetic judges have been appointed by Republican presidents, and in contrast to most federal courts, the district assigns circumstances primarily based on which division they’re filed in slightly than by random project. Ethics consultants have additionally raised potential battle‑of‑curiosity issues as a result of Choose Reed O’Connor, who has overseen a number of lawsuits involving Musk’s platform X, has owned Tesla inventory. O’Connor has typically declined to recuse himself, although he a minimum of as soon as stepped apart after his holdings drew scrutiny.
“It’s actually simply ridiculous,” St Clair mentioned of the countersuit, arguing that X’s phrases of service don’t apply since she’s suing over photos created of her with out her consent, not over her personal use of the platform.
St Clair says she’s now making an attempt to combat the counter-suit, block any venue change to Texas, and combat to determine higher duty from generative AI platforms.
“It’s about holding these platforms accountable and holding these very new generative AI tools accountable when they’re launched without any regard for the damage they’ve done, damage that was completely foreseeable,” she mentioned. “I will never get the images of not only myself, but of other people’s children and other women that I had to see out of my head.”
xAI launched an replace of the chatbot earlier this month and claimed that Grok’s X account was not allowed to edit photos of actual individuals in revealing clothes. St Clair says that customers have discovered workarounds, together with utilizing the standalone Grok app, and the pictures are nonetheless being distributed on the X platform.
“It’s still happening. People are still able to produce these images on the standalone Grok app and website,” she mentioned. “There are also images of me being burned that are being produced. Still, provocative images of me are being produced. It hasn’t stopped.”
European non-profit, AI Forensics, additionally discovered that Grok was nonetheless producing sexualized photos of people regardless of X’s restrictions. The researchers discovered customers bypassing the ban by accessing Grok instantly by its web site slightly than by X, or by utilizing Grok Think about, the AI’s video and picture technology instrument.
St Clair has confronted blowback from her combat with xAI and Musk: Feedback on X usually accuse her of being a vindictive ex-girlfriend who’s after Musk’s cash; she was stripped of her “verified” standing on X and the ad-revenue sharing scheme that got here with it; and, in a single now-deleted X put up, Musk even threatened to sue for full custody of their baby after St Clair made feedback expressing remorse for her earlier stance on trans rights.
Grok has sparked international regulatory scrutiny
X’s “nudifying” development that focused St Clair has sparked international concern partly because of the proliferation of sexualized photos of kids. In response to analysis from the Middle for Countering Digital Hate, of the three million sexualized photos produced by Grok within the 11-period, 23,000 appeared to depict kids, reflecting an estimated common tempo of 1 new sexualized picture of a minor each 41 seconds. These included a selfie uploaded by a schoolgirl who was “undressed” by Grok, and a picture of six younger ladies sporting micro bikinis, generated by Grok.
“It’s really hard not to conclude that this is a disaster of [Elon Musk’s] own making,” Imran Ahmed, the founder and CEO of the Middle for Countering Digital Hate, advised Fortune. “Musk was very clear that in his own personal postings, he mocked people who were concerned about how it was being abused, and seemed to make light of it, rather than take it seriously and seek to remedy the situation for almost two weeks.”
Grok can also be going through a category motion lawsuit in California over the sexualized deepfakes, in addition to a proper probe by the EU Fee. If X is discovered to have breached the EU’s Digital Companies Act, the corporate might face fines of as much as 6% of its international annual income.
“The EU actions are fantastic. I think it’s really a step in the right direction, and I hope more people and leaders follow,” St Clair mentioned. The Trump administration has taken a number of actions in opposition to what it views as European “censorship” and has a selected subject with the Digital Companies Act. In one of many administration’s extra dramatic strikes, in December it barred 5 European nationals, together with Ahmed, from getting into the U.S., for allegedly pressuring tech corporations to censor American viewpoints.
On Monday, the EU regulator mentioned it will assess whether or not “manipulated sexually explicit images” generated by Grok have been proven to customers within the bloc, and warned it might “impose interim measures” if X refuses to implement significant changes. Comparable investigations are underway in Australia, France, and Germany, whereas X was briefly banned in Indonesia and Malaysia.
“AI platforms don’t have the same protections from litigation that social media companies do, and this is an important test of whether or not negligence law and prompt design law can be applied to AI platforms,” Ahmed mentioned. “If it’s found that they are liable, it will likely change the AI chatbot industry forever.”
This story was initially featured on Fortune.com
