An MP Is Asking the High Court to Order xAI to Fix Grok

Jess Asato, Labour MP for Lowestoft, filed a claim against xAI in the High Court in London on 3 June. Court filings reported on 28 July set out what she is now asking the court to order: that xAI "implement effective and permanent technical measures" so that Grok cannot generate manipulated, sexualised images of her, and that it find and remove the material still online.

The legal theory

The claim is brought for misuse of private information and breach of data protection law, seeking damages and a declaration of unlawfulness. Its distinctive argument is about where responsibility sits: her lawyers say the way Grok was designed and trained is what made the content possible, so liability attaches to the developer rather than only to the individual users who typed the prompts. Her solicitor, Ravi Naik of AWO, framed the remedy plainly — a court order "requiring the systems be brought into compliance if xAI refuses to do so." The firm says no case has applied data protection and privacy law to an AI developer this way.

The timeline in the filings

The abuse began in early January, after she posted that using AI to strip women without their consent "is sexual assault designed to degrade and humiliate." Users then prompted Grok to produce sexualised imagery of her, including video. She reported 21 posts in February; two videos had been removed by March, and six posts remained live in late July — despite xAI later stating that users can no longer generate sexualised images of real people.

Where it stands

xAI has not filed a defence and did not respond to requests for comment. No hearing has been listed.

Three fronts at once

Ofcom opened a formal Online Safety Act investigation into X's Irish entity on 12 January over the same category of content — a regulatory process, separate from this private claim. And on 27 July xAI became a plaintiff in the United States, suing Minnesota's attorney general over a state nudification statute on First Amendment grounds. The same product is being defended and attacked in three jurisdictions simultaneously.