By Anugrah Kumar, Christian Post Contributor
Quick Summary
- X appeals $140 million fine imposed by the European Commission under the Digital Services Act.
- The company contends that the penalty amounts to unlawful censorship of free speech.
- The case is the first formal court challenge to a fine under the 2022 Digital Services Act.
Elon Musk’s social platform X is challenging a roughly $140 million fine imposed by the European Commission under the European Union’s Digital Services Act, arguing the penalty amounts to unlawful censorship that violates its free speech rights.
The case opens a closely watched legal fight over how far Brussels can regulate the content practices of major online platforms.
The company lodged its appeal at the General Court of the European Union, seeking to overturn the 120 million euro (over $141 million) penalty issued in December and arguing the decision violated due process protections, according to legal advocacy group ADF International, which is supporting X’s challenge.
The case marks the first time a fine under the 2022 Digital Services Act, or DSA, has been formally contested in court.
The penalty followed an EU investigation that accused the platform of breaching transparency obligations and misleading users through the design of its paid blue checkmark system, The Hill reported. European officials claimed the verification model made it harder for users to determine account authenticity.
“Deceiving users with blue checkmarks, obscuring information on ads and shutting out researchers have no place online in the EU,” Henna Virkkunen, the bloc’s executive vice president for tech sovereignty, security and democracy, said at the time.
X’s Global Government Affairs team pushed back in a public statement, saying the ruling stemmed from “an incomplete and superficial investigation, grave procedural errors, a tortured interpretation of the obligations under the DSA, and systematic breaches of rights of defence and basic due process requirements suggesting prosecutorial bias.”
The company added that the appeal “could set important precedents for enforcement, penalty calculations, and fundamental rights protections” under the regulation.
The DSA gives the European Commission sweeping authority to police content moderation practices on very large online platforms, generally defined as those with more than 45 million monthly users in the EU. Companies that fail to comply can face substantial financial penalties or, in extreme cases, suspension within the bloc.
Regulators opened their investigation into X in December 2023 to examine potential breaches involving risk management, content moderation practices, advertising transparency and data access for researchers. The probe also examined whether the platform properly mitigated risks linked to harmful content, including deepfake sexually explicit material and child sexual abuse imagery.
Three related legal actions challenging the European Commission’s fine were entered on the Court of Justice of the European Union’s docket on Feb. 16, including filings from X Internet Unlimited Company, X Holdings and an action linked to Elon Musk, according to Politico. The Commission had addressed the original penalty to multiple X-affiliated entities.
The dispute unfolds against a backdrop of escalating friction between U.S. officials and European regulators over the DSA’s reach. Vice President JD Vance has criticized the law’s enforcement as censorship and warned about potential global effects on speech rules.
“I can tell you plainly: There can be no security if you are afraid of the voices, the opinions, and the conscience that guide your own people,” Vance said at the Munich Security Conference last February. “What I worry about is the threat from within, the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values.”
ADF International has framed the case as a major test of the commission’s powers. Jeremy Tedesco, the group’s senior counsel and senior vice president of corporate engagement, said the platform is being singled out because of its speech policies.
“The EU Commission is targeting X for a simple reason: X is committed to free speech, and the Commission demands censorship,” Tedesco said. “Americans need to understand what is at stake. The DSA was built for global speech control, and the speech it controls is yours, on the platforms you use every day.”
European officials maintain the law is designed to increase accountability for large technology firms and to protect users online. EU regulators continue to examine whether X adequately assessed and mitigated systemic risks on the service, including concerns tied to its artificial intelligence chatbot Grok.
If the General Court annuls or narrows the penalty, the ruling could reshape the Commission’s enforcement strategy across the bloc’s digital rulebook. If the fine stands, it may strengthen Brussels’ hand as it presses ahead with oversight of major technology platforms operating in Europe.
