Elon Musk Loses Appeal of 'Twitter Sitter' Provision
- 13 days ago
Elon Musk , Loses Appeal of , 'Twitter Sitter' Provision .
On April 29, the Supreme Court denied billionaire
Elon Musk's challenge to the terms of a Securities
and Exchange Commission agreement. .
On April 29, the Supreme Court denied billionaire
Elon Musk's challenge to the terms of a Securities
and Exchange Commission agreement. .
NBC reports that the SEC requirement
would require a lawyer to review
the Tesla CEO's social media posts. .
In his appeal, Musk argued that the SEC's requirement,
which has been dubbed the 'Twitter sitter' provision,
unlawfully imposed conditions on his freedom to comment. .
In his appeal, Musk argued that the SEC's requirement,
which has been dubbed the 'Twitter sitter' provision,
unlawfully imposed conditions on his freedom to comment. .
The SEC requirement stems from Musk's tweets in 2018 that
claimed he was taking Tesla private, which shocked the
market and caused shares in the company to surge.
The SEC requirement stems from Musk's tweets in 2018 that
claimed he was taking Tesla private, which shocked the
market and caused shares in the company to surge.
The SEC deemed the tweets
"materially false and misleading,"
and in clear violation of securities laws.
At the time, Musk agreed to settle the issue
with the SEC, which included his signing off
on the so-called "Twitter sitter" provision.
NBC reports that Musk has since said
the restrictions are unconstitutional and that
he was coerced into signing the SEC agreement.
According to court papers, lawyers
representing Musk have accused the SEC
of waging an "ongoing campaign" against Musk.
Musk's legal team claim the provision , "restricts Mr. Musk’s speech even
when truthful and accurate.".
It extends to speech not
covered by the securities laws
and with no relation to the conduct
underlying the SEC’s civil action, Elon Musk legal team, via NBC.
In response, the SEC said in court papers
that Musk waived his right to appeal
when he signed off on the settlement.
On April 29, the Supreme Court denied billionaire
Elon Musk's challenge to the terms of a Securities
and Exchange Commission agreement. .
On April 29, the Supreme Court denied billionaire
Elon Musk's challenge to the terms of a Securities
and Exchange Commission agreement. .
NBC reports that the SEC requirement
would require a lawyer to review
the Tesla CEO's social media posts. .
In his appeal, Musk argued that the SEC's requirement,
which has been dubbed the 'Twitter sitter' provision,
unlawfully imposed conditions on his freedom to comment. .
In his appeal, Musk argued that the SEC's requirement,
which has been dubbed the 'Twitter sitter' provision,
unlawfully imposed conditions on his freedom to comment. .
The SEC requirement stems from Musk's tweets in 2018 that
claimed he was taking Tesla private, which shocked the
market and caused shares in the company to surge.
The SEC requirement stems from Musk's tweets in 2018 that
claimed he was taking Tesla private, which shocked the
market and caused shares in the company to surge.
The SEC deemed the tweets
"materially false and misleading,"
and in clear violation of securities laws.
At the time, Musk agreed to settle the issue
with the SEC, which included his signing off
on the so-called "Twitter sitter" provision.
NBC reports that Musk has since said
the restrictions are unconstitutional and that
he was coerced into signing the SEC agreement.
According to court papers, lawyers
representing Musk have accused the SEC
of waging an "ongoing campaign" against Musk.
Musk's legal team claim the provision , "restricts Mr. Musk’s speech even
when truthful and accurate.".
It extends to speech not
covered by the securities laws
and with no relation to the conduct
underlying the SEC’s civil action, Elon Musk legal team, via NBC.
In response, the SEC said in court papers
that Musk waived his right to appeal
when he signed off on the settlement.