Elon Musk seeks to end US restrictions on his tweets – The Guardian

Elon Musk has asked a federal judge to terminate his 2018 agreement with the top US securities regulator requiring some of his tweets to be vetted by a lawyer.

Musk also asked the judge to block a US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) subpoena requesting records of pre-approval of a Twitter poll he conducted in November on potentially selling some of his stock.

The SECs pursuit of Mr Musk has crossed the line into harassment, which is quintessential bad faith, Musks lawyers wrote on Tuesday to US District Judge Alison Nathan in Manhattan.

Musks lawyers said the 2018 consent decree resolving SEC securities fraud charges should not allow roving and unbounded investigations into the Tesla CEO, while impeding his constitutional right to free speech.

Legal analysts said Musks push to end the consent decree may fail.

The SEC clearly has authority to enforce a consent decree issued by a federal court without having to conduct a new investigation, said Urska Velikonja, a law professor at Georgetown University Law Center.

Apart from concerns that the consent decree is overbroad and difficult to enforce, which seem plausible, Musks other legal arguments are an exercise in legal silliness, she added.

In early November, Musk posted on Twitter that he would offload 10% of his Tesla stake if users approved.

A majority did, and the poll sent Tesla shares into a slump. Musk has since sold $16.4bn of stock.

The tweet renewed questions about whether Musk complied with his SEC agreement to obtain approval from a Tesla lawyer before issuing written communications about information material to his company or its shareholders.

Tesla said on Tuesday that Musks tweet on stock sales is behavior the SEC should encourage: a CEOs transparency with the public and shareholders about a proposed stock sale.

Musk faces a real uphill fight, according to Stephen Crimmins, a partner at Murphy & McGonigle in New York City.

Courts generally give the SEC a lot of leeway to enforce subpoenas, said Crimmins, who is not connected to the Musk case.

Judges generally take the approach that if you agree to a consent decree, youre stuck with it. Saying you dont like the deal is not going to get you out of it.

The SEC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The regulator sued Musk after he tweeted in August 2018 that he had funding secured to potentially take his electric-car company private at $420 a share.

In reality, a buyout was not close.

Tesla and Musk settled by agreeing to each pay $20m in civil fines and let lawyers vet some of Musks communications in advance, including Twitter posts that could affect Teslas stock price. Musk also gave up Teslas chairmanship.

I never lied to shareholders, Musk told Nathan in a separate court filing. I entered into the consent decree for the survival of Tesla, for the sake of its shareholders.

In his filing, Musk said he was forced to sign the decree, citing the SECs unrelenting regulatory pressure and as the SECs action stood to jeopardize the companys financing.

He said Teslas investor relations teams said at that time that several large shareholders could cede their ownership in Tesla substantially affecting Teslas financing if the case was not settled expediently.

The company on Tuesday accused the SEC of exploiting the consent decree to micro-manage Mr Musks Twitter activity and retaliate against him for criticizing the agency.

Musk has also mocked the agency in his tweets since the 2018 probe: SEC, three letter acronym, middle word is Elons.

He also tweeted in 2020 that Tesla would make short pants in radiant red satin with gold trim and send them to the SEC, which he called the shortseller enrichment commission.

Here is the original post:

Elon Musk seeks to end US restrictions on his tweets - The Guardian