Skip to main content
NOPE
High reported severity Involving minors Lawsuit Filed

xAI sues a South Carolina user over alleged Grok sexual-image abuse

xAI filed a civil complaint against a South Carolina user, alleging that he used Grok to sexualise photographs of real adults and children and evade refusals. The user also faced pending criminal charges. The civil and criminal accusations remain allegations.

AI system
Grok
xAI (X.AI LLC, the plaintiff; described in later coverage as SpaceXAI)
Occurred
8 Dec 2025 to 18 Feb 2026
Reported
15 July 2026
Event location
United States
What the AI did
Depicted or impersonated the person
Reported harm
Exploitation or Abuse
Whose AI use
Someone else’s AI use
Setting
Privacy · Justice
Evidence
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 6 sources, 5 underlying accounts
5 claims: 5 documented. 4 open questions
People reported harmed
Not reliably quantifiable from the sources

AI system as recorded: Grok (xAI image generation and editing)

What Happened

xAI filed a civil complaint against a South Carolina user, alleging that he used Grok to sexualise photographs of real adults and children and evade refusals. The user also faced pending criminal charges. The civil and criminal accusations remain allegations.

Reported harm

Per xAI's complaint, numerous real adults and minors had non-sexual photographs of themselves altered by Grok into sexualized images and videos at the defendant's prompting; the complaint anticipates claims by those victims. No depicted person is identified in the inspected sources.

Outcome

Ongoing

xAI filed a civil complaint against a South Carolina user, alleging that he used Grok to sexualise photographs of real adults and children and evade refusals. The user also faced pending criminal charges. The civil and criminal accusations remain allegations.

What remains unknown

  • No depicted person is identified, counted or located in any inspected source; whether any has been notified or has made a claim is unknown.
  • Whether the material underlying the South Carolina charges is the Grok-generated material described in xAI's complaint is not stated by the attorney general's release.
  • The defendant's answer or other response in the civil case is not on the docket as inspected (last entry 31 July 2026); the status of the criminal case after March 2026 was not researched.
  • The complaint's account of Grok's refusals and of which prompts succeeded rests on xAI's internal review and is not independently verified.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: reported. xAI's own complaint, pleaded upon information and belief from its review of the defendant's accounts, alleges that Grok altered uploaded photographs of real people into sexualized images and videos after repeated prompt variations; the state attorney general's arrest release does not mention AI, and no court has ruled on the allegations.

5 claims: 5 documented. What the statuses mean

Documented X.AI LLC filed a breach-of-contract action in the Northern District of Texas on 14 July 2026, No. 7:26-cv-00078. Summons was served on 28 July.

Causal attribution. Filing facts are established directly by the docket and the complaint.

  • courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Docket header: 'Date Filed: July 14, 2026'; 'Assigned To: Reed Charles O'Connor'; 'Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract'; entry 6: 'SUMMONS Returned Executed as to [name withheld] ; served on 7/28/2026'.
  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Caption 'Case 7:26-cv-00078-O Document 1 Filed 07/14/26'; paragraph 11 (plaintiff) and paragraph 12 (defendant's [locality withheld] address).
  • cnn.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas'
Documented xAI’s complaint alleges that the accused used two accounts to generate sexual images of adults and children from their photographs between December 2025 and February 2026, including repeated attempts after refusals.

Causal attribution. These are the plaintiff's allegations, pleaded upon information and belief from xAI's review of the accounts; no court has ruled on them and the defendant's response is not on the docket.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Paragraph 26 (accounts created 8 and 10 December 2025); paragraph 27 ('at least as early as December 8, 2025 and at least as late as February 18, 2026... uploaded non-sexual images of numerous adults and minors'); paragraph 28 ('repeatedly submitted further prompts, with alterations, in an effort to circumvent Grok's... images produced by Defendant involved the likeness of minor children'); paragraphs 29-33 (the 10-or-11-year-old example and Grok's refusal).
  • engadget.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'Grok refused to follow his prompts on "numerous occasions" but... he repeatedly submitted edited prompts to circumvent the AI's safeguards... uploaded the photo of a fully dressed girl around 10 to 11 years old'
  • cnn.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'alleges [name withheld] created multiple xAI accounts and entered "misleading prompts" to create explicit deepfakes of both minors and adults'
Documented The complaint states that xAI suspended 52,222 accounts and made 73,604 NCMEC reports in 2026, resulting in at least 244 arrests, and was cooperating with the criminal proceedings against this defendant.

Causal attribution. xAI's own figures as stated in its pleading; not independently verified.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Paragraph 6: 'Plaintiff has suspended 52,222 accounts and made 73,604 reports to NCMEC in 2026, resulting in (at least) 244 arrests'; paragraph 34: 'Plaintiff is actively providing its full' cooperation (the sentence continues across the page break to page 10).
  • cnn.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'xAI claims that it "has suspended 52,222 accounts and made 73,604 reports to (National Center for Missing & Exploited Children) in 2026, resulting in (at least) 244 arrests."'
Documented South Carolina authorities arrested the accused on 26 February 2026 after NCMEC reports and announced three second-degree and five third-degree sexual-exploitation charges. The release stresses presumed innocence and does not mention AI.

Causal attribution. The charges are established by the attorney general's release; whether the charged material was Grok-generated is not stated by the release.

  • scag.gov(opens in new tab) supports · English
    '[name withheld] was arrested on February 26, 2026. He is charged with three counts of sexual exploitation of a minor, second degree (§16-15-405)... and five counts of sexual exploitation of a minor, third degree (§16-15-410)'; 'Investigators received CyberTipline reports from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), which led them to [name withheld]'; 'all defendants are presumed innocent'.
  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Paragraph 34 quotes the 9 March 2026 announcement and lists [locality withheld] case numbers 2026A3010100169-71 and 2026A3010100174-78.
  • engadget.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'The office of South Carolina's Attorney General announced [name withheld]'s arrest on March 9'
Documented xAI seeks a declaration of breach, indemnification for the costs of defending any claims by the people depicted, damages and a permanent ban from Grok.

Causal attribution. Relief sought as pleaded.

  • storage.courtlistener.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    Paragraph 10 and the prayer for relief (B: declare breach; C: indemnify; D: damages; injunction against new accounts or further use).
  • engadget.com(opens in new tab) supports · English
    'xAI is now asking asking [sic] the court for an unspecified amount of monetary damages. It wants the court to order the defendant to pay for the expenses it incurs to defend itself in any legal action that might be filed by his victims.'

Sources

6 sources inspected, from 5 underlying accounts. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in English on 2026-09-16 (pdftotext, 12 pages; paragraphs 6-10, 12, 26-34, 41-47 and the prayer for relief). Applies to s1.

Read in English on 2026-09-16: six docket entries (complaint 14 July, summons issued 15 July, summons returned executed 31 July, served 28 July 2026). Applies to s2.

Read in English on 2026-09-16 (undated page; the complaint dates the release 9 March 2026). Applies to s3.

Read in English on 2026-09-16 (datePublished 2026-07-16); reports the complaint and the arrest release. Applies to s4.

Read in English on 2026-09-16 (datePublished 2026-07-16T02:05Z, i.e. 15 July US time); reports the complaint; CNN reached out to his criminal-defense attorney. Applies to s5.

Read in English on 2026-09-16 (datePublished 2026-07-17); reports the complaint via Reuters and places it among the suits xAI faces. Applies to s6.

Event countries: United States. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: United States.

Event: the defendant's account use from [locality withheld], South Carolina (complaint paragraph 12; attorney general's release); the depicted people's locations are not reported, so affected-person countries are unknown. Courts: N.D. Texas (civil) and [locality withheld], South Carolina (criminal).

Reviewed for publication 2026-09-16: Restored under the 2026-09-15 charter as a harmful-artifact case documented by court records: the provider's own complaint alleges that its image tool was made to sexualize photographs of real adults and children, and the state has charged the user with exploitation offences. The allegations are recorded as allegations, the depicted people are unidentified and uncounted,.

People described

Unnamed adults and children whose photographs were allegedly altered into sexual images.

People reported harmed in this case

Not reliably quantifiable from the sources

The complaint refers to 'numerous adults and minors' without a count and gives one example; the attorney general's release counts charges, not victims. No reliable count of depicted people exists.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#grok#xai#deepfake#csam#lawsuit#south-carolina#terms-of-service

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). xAI sues a South Carolina user over alleged Grok sexual-image abuse. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2025-south-carolina-alleged-grok-sexual-image-abuse

BibTeX

@misc{2025_south_carolina_alleged_grok_sexual_image_abuse,
  title = {xAI sues a South Carolina user over alleged Grok sexual-image abuse},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2025-south-carolina-alleged-grok-sexual-image-abuse}
}

Related cases

High Grok

Arkansas cases allege Grok sexual-image abuse of children photographed by a professional

Arkansas criminal and civil cases allege that a photographer used children’s portrait photographs to generate sexual images with Grok. The accused pleaded not guilty. Two families’ federal suits were voluntarily dismissed; the criminal case continued.

High Grok

St. Clair v. xAI: a writer says Grok made and published sexualized images of her on X, including from a photo of her at 14, after it told her it would not; xAI sued her in Texas and her New York case was ordered transferred there, an order the Second Circuit has stayed pending her mandamus petition

Ashley St. Clair, a writer and political commentator with about 1 million followers on X, sued xAI in New York on 15 January 2026. She alleges that from on or about 4 January 2026 Grok, prompted by other X users, altered photos of her into sexualized images and published them on X, including one made from a photo of her at 14. She says @Grok told her that her images would not be used or altered without explicit consent, but many more images followed. She also says X's reporting channel found no violation and that X removed her Premium subscription, verification checkmark and monetization. She says she has suffered serious pain, mental distress and humiliation. The same day, xAI sued her in federal court in Texas, arguing that its terms of service required her to sue there. On 23 June 2026 the New York federal court ordered her case transferred to Texas. On 8 July the Second Circuit stayed that order administratively while it considers her mandamus petition, which was still pending on 24 August. The Texas case is set for trial on 1 March 2027.

High Grok

Wyoming plaintiff alleges Grok was used to make about 7,000 AI-generated sexual images and videos from a photograph of the plaintiff as a child

A Wyoming woman who is now an adult and is identified in court filings as Jane Doe 4 alleges that the plaintiff’s stepfather uploaded a photograph of the plaintiff taken in childhood to xAI’s Grok on or before 12 February 2026 and prompted Grok to generate about 7,000 AI-generated sexual images and videos of the plaintiff, and that the stepfather traded them online. The plaintiff joined a proposed class action against xAI in the Northern District of California through an amended complaint filed on 7 July 2026. The complaint alleges that xAI’s report to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children around 12 February 2026 did not include the generated images or the IP address of the upload, that investigators obtained a search warrant on or about 27 February 2026 and found the material, and that the accused died two days later, after release on bail. The plaintiff reports severe distress including depression and suicidal thoughts and told the Washington Post about starting therapy. The complaint says the accused was charged with child exploitation offenses while the plaintiff told the Post that the accused was not charged with child pornography offenses. xAI did not respond to the Post and had not answered the complaint in court. The allegations have not been tested in court. The plaintiff and the accused are not named here, and the images are described only by kind.

Medium Grok

Minneapolis: Grok reportedly generated and posted on X a sexualized altered image of a photograph of a woman killed in a shooting, at a user's request

A woman was killed by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis on 7 January 2026. Mother Jones reports that an X user asked Grok to alter a photograph of the woman into a sexualized image and that Grok complied and published the result on X, citing a CNN correspondent's post and Grok's own replies, in which the chatbot said it had used sensitive content unintentionally and that the image may violate the 2025 TAKE IT DOWN Act. Mother Jones dates the request to Wednesday 7 January, while the correspondent's post is dated Thursday 8 January and the New York Times reports requests to Grok about the woman on Thursday. Rolling Stone and the Southern Poverty Law Center's Hatewatch describe the same episode. The woman was already dead when the image was made, so the death is context only and no source connects it to an AI system. No statement from relatives about the image was found. The record does not name the woman and describes the image only as a sexualized alteration.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents