MINNEAPOLIS | 7 August, 2026— The Liberty Justice Center filed a friend-of-the-court brief yesterday urging a federal court to block enforcement of a new Minnesota law that restricts AI-generated images and videos so broadly that it prohibits vast quantities of constitutionally protected speech. LJC argues that whatever authority Minnesota may have to regulate harmful uses of AI, the First Amendment does not permit the state to restrict vast amounts of lawful expression along with them.
The lawsuit, filed by xAI LLC, challenges Minnesota’s HF 1606, which regulates AI tools used to generate or alter images and videos. The law reaches far beyond its stated purpose: It requires neither intent nor knowledge and can apply even when the person depicted consents and the resulting image is never shared publicly.
It reaches political satire, artistic expression, educational content, consensual image editing and other lawful uses of AI while exposing xAI to sweeping liability for the speech of its users. The result is powerful pressure to suppress protected speech rather than risk penalties of up to $500,000 for each violation. Even purely private, consensual uses of the technology can trigger liability.
“The First Amendment has protected every major communications revolution in American history, from the printing press to the internet. Artificial intelligence is no exception. The Constitution doesn’t become obsolete every time technology evolves,” said Timothy Snowball, Senior Counsel at the Liberty Justice Center. “Minnesota may have an interest in regulating certain uses of AI. But whatever the government’s objective, the First Amendment does not allow it to prohibit vast amounts of protected speech along the way. The Constitution requires precision when government regulates speech. HF 1606 is anything but precise.”
AI is changing how Americans create art, communicate ideas, participate in political debate and express themselves. But the constitutional principle is not new: First Amendment protections do not disappear simply because the medium of expression changes.
“Every generation invents a new way to communicate, and every new technology tests old efforts to censor speech. AI is this generation’s test,” said Snowball. “The technology may change. The First Amendment does not.”
Although the lawsuit was filed by xAI, the constitutional principle at stake reaches far beyond any one company. The outcome will help determine whether governments may broadly restrict protected expression whenever a new communications technology emerges—or whether the First Amendment will continue to protect Americans regardless of the tools they use to speak.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. xAI has asked the court to preliminarily block enforcement of HF 1606 while its constitutional challenge proceeds.
About the Case
xAI LLC filed suit challenging Minnesota’s HF 1606, arguing that the law is an unconstitutional restriction on protected speech. The Liberty Justice Center filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting xAI’s request for a preliminary injunction because the case presents significant questions regarding free speech, overbreadth and the constitutional limits on government regulation of emerging technologies.