US joins Musk in fight to overturn €120m EU fine on X

The United States Department of Justice has formally announced its support for Elon Musk’s legal challenge to a €120 million fine imposed by the European Commission on X, the company formerly known as Twitter. The fine, announced in December 2025, was levied for allowing users to purchase a blue-verified check mark without providing meaningful verification of the account holder.

In a filing with the EU’s General Court, the DOJ argues that the Commission’s decision overreaches U.S. jurisdiction and that the United States has a clear interest in ensuring that any ruling is consistent with international law’s understanding of territorial jurisdiction. The application cites a provision of the Statute of the Court of Justice that permits a state to intervene in a case if it can demonstrate a legitimate interest in the outcome. The DOJ further contends that a decision against X could prejudice U.S.-headquartered digital services that contribute significantly to the American economy.

The European Commission has responded by stating it is prepared to defend its position. Commission spokesperson Thomas Regnier said the agency has a solid case grounded in a breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA). The fine is the Commission’s first formal non-compliance decision under the DSA, which sets mandatory rules for online platforms operating in the EU. In addition to the blue-tick issue, regulators have accused X of failing to provide transparency around advertising and of denying researchers access to public data. The Commission’s executive vice-president for tech sovereignty, Henna Virkkunen, described X’s conduct as undermining user rights and evading accountability.

U.S. political figures have also weighed in. Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized the Commission as an “attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments,” a statement that Musk reposted with the comment “absolutely.” The Federal Communications Commission has echoed concerns that the EU’s actions amount to censorship of U.S. firms. The Commission maintains that it is not targeting any specific nationality but is upholding digital and democratic standards that it views as a global benchmark.

For founders and operators, the case underscores the growing complexity of navigating cross-border regulatory frameworks. Compliance with the DSA now involves more than merely meeting technical requirements; it requires robust verification processes, transparent advertising disclosures, and openness to research access. Failure to meet these obligations can result in substantial fines and legal challenges that threaten operational continuity and brand reputation.

Investors watching X must consider the financial and reputational risks associated with regulatory disputes. A €120 million penalty represents a significant hit to the company’s bottom line, and the uncertainty surrounding the outcome could affect investor confidence and valuation. Moreover, the DOJ’s intervention signals that U.S. authorities are willing to engage in international legal battles to protect domestic digital services, potentially setting a precedent for future cross-border regulatory disputes.

The EU is also investigating other aspects of X’s operations, including the use of its integrated AI assistant Grok, which has been linked to the creation of sexualised images of real people. These concurrent investigations suggest that the Commission is taking a comprehensive approach to enforcing the DSA.

As the case proceeds, the tech community will be watching closely to see whether the EU’s enforcement strategy will be upheld, modified, or overturned. The outcome will shape the regulatory landscape for digital platforms worldwide and could influence how founders design compliance programs, how investors assess risk, and how governments coordinate cross-border regulatory enforcement.