US seeks to join case over X fine
The US Department of Justice is backing Elon Musk and X’s appeal against a €120 million European fine.
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
The United States has asked to join Elon Musk and X’s court case against a European fine. Washington calls the sanction an example of unwanted European interference in US technology companies.
The US Department of Justice on Thursday submitted a request to the General Court of the European Union to join the cases brought by X and Elon Musk against the European Commission. The US government wants to support the appeal in which X and Musk seek to have a €120 million fine annulled.
The European Commission imposed the fine on X on 5 December 2025. According to the Commission, the platform breached the Digital Services Act, the EU regulation on digital services, in three areas: the way the paid blue tick was presented, the transparency of the advertising repository and researchers’ access to public data.
The US Department argues that the Commission has extended its powers too far. According to Washington, the decision affects US companies that are not established in the European Union or do not operate there. The US government also objects to the way the Commission attributes responsibility to Musk and other companies he owns.
That position forms part of the US request and is not a ruling by the European court. The General Court must first decide whether the United States may intervene. It must then still consider X and Musk’s substantive objections to the Commission’s decision.
The case is a new chapter in the conflict over the scope of European digital rules. The Digital Services Act requires very large online platforms, among other things, to be more transparent about advertising, give researchers access to data and manage the risks of their services more effectively.
The European Commission calls its sanction the first fine for non-compliance with the Digital Services Act. The Commission says the blue tick could have given users a misleading impression of control or verification, and that the advertising repository and access to public data were not sufficiently useful for researchers to conduct oversight.
X has meanwhile also proposed measures to meet European requirements. The Commission accepted that plan in July, including improvements to the advertising repository and independent oversight. That acceptance does not remove the ongoing appeal against the earlier fine.
The US move could also give the case a broader diplomatic dimension. For European regulators, enforcement of rules for large platforms is central; for Washington, it is also about how far European regulation may reach when companies have a US parent company or owner. A ruling is not expected in the short term.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The United States has asked to intervene in X and Elon Musk’s appeal against a European Commission decision.
- The European Commission imposed a €120 million fine on X for three breaches of the Digital Services Act.
- The EU General Court has not yet issued a substantive ruling.
- The Commission later accepted a remediation plan from X for some of the identified shortcomings.
Left
Arguments Large platforms have so much influence over public information and societal safety that binding European rules and robust enforcement are necessary. US intervention on Musk’s behalf may be seen as putting corporate interests above public oversight.
Values Limiting power, consumer protection, transparency and democratic oversight.
Consequences Without enforcement, platforms may have fewer incentives to make advertising, recommendation systems and data use subject to scrutiny.
Centre
Arguments European rules may be enforced, but sanctions must be legally precise, proportionate and reviewable. Both the Commission’s authority and the objections of X and Musk should be examined by an independent court.
Values The rule of law, predictable regulation, proportionality and institutional oversight.
Consequences A careful ruling can clarify the responsibilities of platforms and their owners without unnecessarily stretching oversight or the international legal order.
Right
Arguments The EU should be restrained with rules that affect US companies and their owners outside European territory. The US move defends national authority, entrepreneurship and freedom of expression against what may be experienced as cross-border regulatory overreach.
Values National sovereignty, economic freedom, limited government power and freedom of expression.
Consequences If European rules have global effect, international companies may face higher compliance costs and tensions between trading blocs may increase further.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The core facts have been confirmed by the US Department of Justice, the European Commission and the EU General Court. Washington’s positions have been attributed as such; the outcome of the request and the appeal remains open.
- confirmed The US Department of Justice asked on 24 September 2026 to intervene in the cases brought by X and Elon Musk. — This is stated in the department’s official press release. source
- confirmed The European Commission imposed a €120 million fine on X on 5 December 2025. — The Commission gives the amount and date in its decision imposing the sanction. source
- confirmed The fine concerned the blue tick, the advertising repository and researchers’ access to public data. — These three breaches are identified by the Commission. source
- confirmed The EU General Court has yet to rule on the cases brought by X and Musk. — The case Musk v Commission is registered as pending before the EU General Court. source
- confirmed The Commission accepted a plan from X in July 2026 to remedy the shortcomings. — This is stated in the official notice about the action plan. source
- confirmed The US government argues that the European Commission has extended its powers too far. — This is an attributed position from the US request to intervene. source
Editor's note
It is certain that the US Department of Justice has submitted a request to intervene and that the European Commission imposed a €120 million fine on X. It remains uncertain whether the United States will be admitted to the case and how the General Court will rule on the substance.Sources
- United States Files Request to Intervene in Case Brought by X Corp. and Elon Musk — U.S. Department of Justice
- Commission fines X €120 million under the Digital Services Act — Europese Commissie
- Commission accepts X’s action plan to comply with Digital Services Act — Europese Commissie
- US seeks to join Musk’s fight against EU fine — Free Malaysia Today / AFP
- Musk v Commission, Case T-121/26 — Gerecht van de Europese Unie
More on this in Dutch media
- NOS — „elon musk”
- Het Parool — „elon musk”
- NRC — „elon musk”