US files to intervene in EU’s €120 million Digital Services Act fine against X
Justice Department seeks to support X’s legal challenge to a precedent-setting EU sanction, citing risks to American tech firms and US-EU relations.
1 source · cross-referenced
- The US government filed an application to intervene in X’s legal challenge against a €120 million (≈$137 million) EU fine under the Digital Services Act.
- The EU sanctioned X in December for breaching transparency obligations, including misleading ‘verified’ account labels and incomplete ad repositories.
- The US argues it must protect American companies from alleged EU regulatory overreach that could harm innovation and economic growth.
- The case tests the scope of US-EU tensions over digital regulation, with Trump calling DSA penalties ‘overseas extortion.’
The US Department of Justice, with State Department support, filed an application to intervene in X’s legal challenge against a €120 million fine issued by the European Commission under the Digital Services Act (DSA). The Luxembourg-based EU General Court will determine whether the US has standing to participate in the case.
The US government argues its involvement is necessary to protect American companies from what it calls regulatory overreach by the European Commission. Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division stated, “We will not tolerate the European Commission engaging in regulatory overreach to try and control American engines of innovation and economic growth.”
The DSA fine against X, announced in December, followed a two-year investigation that found the platform breached transparency obligations. The Commission ruled that X misled users by labeling accounts with blue checkmarks as “verified” when the status could be purchased, and that the company’s advertising repository was inaccessible and incomplete. The EU also cited X’s failure to provide adequate public data access for researchers studying platform risks.
In July, the European Commission accepted X’s plan to address data access issues, giving the company six months to implement the changes. Both Elon Musk and X filed appeals against the ruling in February, arguing the investigation was “incomplete and superficial,” the interpretation of DSA obligations was “tortured,” and that they were denied “rights of defence,” which they claimed suggested prosecutorial bias.
The case has broader implications for US-EU relations, with President Donald Trump previously describing DSA penalties as “overseas extortion.” Last year, he threatened tariffs on countries implementing digital regulations he argued were designed to “harm, or discriminate against, American technology.” Vice President JD Vance has also criticized the DSA’s content moderation rules as “authoritarian censorship.”
The DSA is the EU’s framework requiring large online platforms to address illegal and harmful content, with penalties designed to ensure compliance. Major US-based platforms such as Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Google’s YouTube, and Microsoft’s LinkedIn are subject to these rules, which the US government asserts could disproportionately impact American economic interests.
- Oct 13, 2026 · Wired
OpenAI and Anthropic urge UK lawmakers to adopt binding AI safety rules
Trust75 - Oct 13, 2026 · TechCrunch — AI
Federal judge grants Apple expedited access to OpenAI hiring records in trade secrets case
Trust79 - Oct 13, 2026 · TechCrunch — AI
Microsoft president urges global AI regulation and says UK is best positioned to lead
Trust71