Podchaser Logo
Home
Elon Musk Loses to Supreme Court

Elon Musk Loses to Supreme Court

Released Tuesday, 30th April 2024
Good episode? Give it some love!
Elon Musk Loses to Supreme Court

Elon Musk Loses to Supreme Court

Elon Musk Loses to Supreme Court

Elon Musk Loses to Supreme Court

Tuesday, 30th April 2024
Good episode? Give it some love!
Rate Episode

Episode Transcript

Transcripts are displayed as originally observed. Some content, including advertisements may have changed.

Use Ctrl + F to search

0:02

This episode is brought to you by

0:04

Visit Williamsburg. In Williamsburg, Virginia,

0:06

there's never too much of a

0:08

good thing. Whether you're a foodie,

0:11

a golfer, a history buff, a

0:13

shopaholic, an outdoor enthusiast, or a

0:15

thrill seeker, you'll find what you

0:17

came for here and more. So ask

0:19

yourself, So ask yourself, what

0:21

is it you want? Discover Williamsburg

0:24

and plan your trip at visitwilliamsburg.com.

0:27

Thank you, Leo. This can work.

0:35

instant transaction alerts, and savings goals

0:37

you can actually achieve. I've been

0:40

using Krent for years and they're

0:42

a great institution. If you'd

0:44

like to get $50 by signing up to

0:46

Krent, please follow the link

0:48

in the show notes. Join

0:51

Krent today and experience banking that

0:53

keeps up with you. Welcome back

0:55

to the Elon Musk podcast. This

0:57

is a show where we discuss

0:59

the critical crossroads that shape SpaceX,

1:01

Tesla, X, the boring company, and

1:03

Neuralink. And I'm your host, Will

1:05

Walden. The US Supreme

1:07

Court recently decided not to consider a

1:10

challenge from Elon Musk against

1:12

an agreement he made with the

1:14

Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC,

1:16

which mandates that his social media

1:18

posts be pre-approved by a legal

1:20

expert if they pertain to his company, Tesla.

1:24

This decision effectively upholds earlier rulings

1:26

from lower courts and sustains stipulations

1:28

of the 2018 settlement

1:31

that followed Musk's controversial tweets

1:33

about potentially taking Tesla private.

1:36

Musk had appealed to the Supreme Court following

1:39

a decision by the Second U.S. Circuit Court

1:41

of Appeals in New York, which

1:43

sided with the SEC, and is

1:45

contention centered on what he refers

1:48

to as the Twitter sitter provision,

1:50

arguing that it unjustly limits his

1:52

freedom of expression online, specifically regarding

1:55

matters related to Tesla. The

1:57

provisions that Musk disputed were put in

2:00

place after his tweet in August of

2:02

2018 where he claimed to have secured

2:04

the funding needed to take Tesla private

2:06

at $420 per share. Now these tweets significantly

2:11

impacted Tesla's stock price and led

2:13

to temporary trading halts prompting an

2:15

SEC investigation into their accuracy and

2:17

compliance with security laws. Now the

2:20

SEC alleged that must statements were

2:23

materially false and misleading thus violating

2:25

security laws designed to prevent fraud

2:27

and protect investors. As a result

2:30

Musk and Tesla faced civil

2:32

securities actions culminating in a

2:34

settlement that included civil fines

2:36

and the contested pre-approval requirement

2:38

for Musk's relevant tweets. The

2:40

settlement terms required that

2:42

any public communications by Musk that could

2:44

affect Tesla stock must first

2:46

be reviewed and approved by a qualified

2:49

attorney from Tesla. This was

2:51

intended to prevent any dissemination of

2:53

potentially misleading information that could affect

2:55

the market and Tesla shareholders. Now

2:58

despite agreeing to the terms of the settlement

3:00

in 2018 Musk later pushed back against them

3:03

arguing that they imposed on unconstitutional restriction

3:05

of his speech. His lawyers

3:07

maintained that the SEC had exceeded

3:09

its authority by opposing conditions that

3:11

were not only restrictive but also

3:14

unrelated to the original misconduct. Lower

3:16

courts had consistently dismissed Musk's arguments ruling

3:18

that he had voluntarily agreed to the

3:20

terms of the settlement. The

3:22

courts highlighted that by signing the agreement

3:25

Musk had waived any rights to challenge

3:27

the pre-approval provisions on the basis of

3:29

free speech. Now the Supreme

3:31

Court's refusal to hear Musk's appeal

3:33

leaves a lower course decision intact

3:35

confirming that the provisions of the

3:37

2018 settlement will remain unforceable. This

3:39

decision shows that the court stands

3:42

on the enforceability of settlement agreements,

3:44

particularly those involving regulatory oversight and

3:47

public interest. Legal

3:49

experts suggest the outcome of this

3:51

case reflects the judiciary's deferrance to

3:54

settlement agreements that are entered into

3:56

voluntarily, especially those that involve regulatory

3:58

agencies like the S.C.E. which

4:01

are tasked with maintaining market

4:03

integrity and investor confidence. Additionally,

4:05

the case has broader implications for corporate

4:07

executives and their use of social media,

4:10

showing that the legal responsibilities

4:12

that come with disseminating information

4:15

that has the potential to impact

4:17

markets and also investor decisions. Now

4:20

Musk's acquisition of Twitter, now renamed

4:22

X in 2022,

4:24

further complicates his personal entanglement with

4:26

issues of corporate governance and communication,

4:29

given his active presence and substantial following

4:31

on the platform. And the ongoing

4:33

scrutiny of Musk's tweets by the SEC, including

4:35

a 2011 inquiry into

4:37

whether he violated the sentiment by

4:40

failing to obtain pre-approval for a

4:42

tweet about selling Tesla stock, illustrates

4:45

the continuous regulatory oversight he's under

4:47

as a result of his online

4:49

activities. And supporters of

4:52

Musk argue that the SEC's

4:54

actions reflect an overly aggressive

4:56

regulatory approach that stifles innovation

4:58

and free speech in the

5:00

corporate realm. They claim that

5:02

such stringent controls on communications

5:04

are detrimental to the dynamic

5:06

environment needed for technological and

5:08

corporate advancement. Critics, however,

5:10

applaud the SEC's firm stance as

5:13

necessary to ensure transparency and

5:15

honesty in corporate communications, particularly

5:17

in an era where social

5:20

media can instantly alter market

5:22

landscapes and influence investor behavior.

5:27

This episode is brought to you

5:30

by Shopify. Forget the frustration of

5:32

picking commerce platforms when you switch

5:34

or business to shopify. The global

5:37

commerce platform that super as you're

5:39

selling where ever you sell with

5:42

Shopify. Kill Harness the same intuitive

5:44

features, trusted apps and powerful analytics

5:46

used by the world's leading brands.

5:49

Sign up today for your one

5:51

dollar per month trial period at

5:53

shopify.com/tech all lower. That's shopify.com/ Tech.

6:02

And when you download the Kroger app, you'll

6:04

enjoy over $500 in savings every week with

6:06

digital coupons. And don't forget FuelPoints to help

6:09

you save up to $1 per gallon at

6:11

the pump. Want to save even

6:13

more? With a Boost membership, you'll get double

6:15

FuelPoints and free delivery! So shop and

6:17

save big at Kroger today! Kroger,

6:20

fresh for everyone! Savings may vary

6:22

by state. Restrictions apply. Seasight for

6:24

details. The for male with

6:26

the of a supreme court's decision. Not

6:28

to intervene may serve as

6:30

a cautionary tale for other

6:32

executives about the legal in

6:34

the financial responsibilities and repercussions

6:36

of the statements of social

6:38

media especially those capable of

6:40

influencing property value and of

6:42

distractions. Law. So signals a reinforcement

6:44

of the pounder. ease. Of Corporate

6:47

Communications. Especially. For figures

6:49

like Elon Musk, who statements have

6:51

the power to cause significant market

6:53

movements and attract intense public and

6:56

regulatory scrutiny, Rom. Must has

6:58

not publicly commented on the supreme court's decision.

7:00

The. Resolution of this battle makes

7:02

an important chapter. In. The

7:04

ongoing debate over the intersection of

7:06

free speech rights and regulatory obligations

7:09

in the digital Age. Hey.

7:11

Thank you so much for missing today!

7:13

I really do appreciate your support ticket.

7:15

take a second and hit the subscribe

7:17

or the follow button and whatever podcast

7:19

by from the tear this thing I

7:21

am right now. I'd greatly appreciated A

7:23

Health South the show tremendously and you'll

7:25

never miss an episode and each episode

7:27

is about ten minutes or less to

7:29

get you caught up quickly. And please

7:31

if you want to support the show

7:33

even more could a Petri on.com/stage Zero

7:35

And please take care of yourselves and

7:37

each other and I'll see you tomorrow.

Unlock more with Podchaser Pro

  • Audience Insights
  • Contact Information
  • Demographics
  • Charts
  • Sponsor History
  • and More!
Pro Features