A federal judge has cleared the way for Minnesota's first-in-the-nation ban on so-called “nudify” apps to take effect, dealing an early procedural setback to Elon Musk's xAI. The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank, stems less from the law's merits than from xAI's own timing—the company waited nearly three months after the statute was signed before seeking an emergency block. Main Developments Judge Frank denied xAI's request for a temporary restraining order, writing that the company filed on July 29, 2026—just three days before the law was set to take effect on August 1. The judge concluded that such a delay “suggests that harm is not immediate,” undermining xAI's argument for emergency relief. This ruling does not end xAI's broader lawsuit against the ban; it simply allows the law to go into force while the case proceeds through the courts. xAI's underlying complaint contends the statute is “overinclusive” and that less restrictive alternatives could achieve the same goals. Read also: Why Hank Green's AI confession reveals a creator crisis Background The controversy traces back to earlier this year, when users of Musk's social media platform X used xAI's Grok chatbot to flood the platform with non-consensual sexualized images. The incident triggered investigations and bans, highlighting the real-world harms that nudify apps can enable. Minnesota's law, the first of its kind in the United States, was designed to curb these applications by prohibiting their creation and distribution. xAI, which is now part of SpaceX alongside X, has positioned itself as a defender of free expression and innovation in its legal challenge. Why It Matters The ruling sets a precedent for how quickly courts may treat emergency challenges to AI-related legislation, especially when plaintiffs delay action. For Minnesota residents, the law now provides immediate protections against a growing form of digital abuse. For the tech industry, the case represents a broader test of how far states can go in regulating AI tools that have harmful applications. A final ruling on the law's constitutionality could influence similar bans being considered elsewhere. What's Next xAI's lawsuit will continue, with the company now needing to litigate the merits of its overinclusiveness claim while the ban remains in effect. The court will eventually decide whether Minnesota's approach violates constitutional protections or survives scrutiny. Observers will watch for whether other states follow Minnesota's lead, or whether the lawsuit's outcome shapes the national conversation on AI regulation. No further hearings have been scheduled as of this report.