Elon Musk is facing significant challenges as he prepares to enter federal court in San Francisco, where he will stand trial for allegedly manipulating the stock of Twitter, now known as X. As jury selection begins, the billionaire’s legal team struggles to find impartial jurors, with many prospective members of the jury openly expressing their negative opinions about him.
Judge Charles R. Breyer addressed over 90 potential jurors, emphasizing the need for an unbiased perspective. He asked them to set aside any pre-existing views they might have about Musk, Twitter, or Tesla and to focus solely on the evidence presented during the trial. He pointedly remarked, “Whatever your opinion is on Mr. Musk… can you set it aside in the sense that you will judge the defendant based solely… on the evidence produced in this trial?”
Musk’s connections to the Trump administration have notably increased public sentiment against him. The billionaire reportedly contributed nearly $300 million to Trump’s presidential campaign and spearheaded a project aimed at streamlining the federal government known as the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. Judge Breyer was clear in his instruction to potential jurors that personal opinions about political figures should not sway their judgment in this case.
The judge’s attempt to maintain objectivity did not go unnoticed, as more than one-third of those called to serve indicated their inability to remain impartial. Many who were not immediately dismissed still claimed they could set aside biases, although they admitted to harboring a negative opinion about Musk. These remarks infuriated Musk’s attorney, Stephen Broome, who argued that any juror expressing outright disdain for a defendant would typically be dismissed in any other case.
However, Judge Breyer maintained that it is permissible for jurors to hold personal opinions about public figures like Musk, acknowledging that public figures tend to evoke strong views. Breyer stated, “The question is whether or not they can set them aside.”
The trial is scheduled to commence on March 2 and is expected to run through March 16. It stems from allegations that Musk manipulated the stock price of Twitter during his controversial $44 billion acquisition of the platform. Accusations against him include making misleading statements regarding the number of spam or fake accounts on the site, which plaintiffs allege caused significant fluctuations in Twitter’s share price.
In May 2022, Musk tweeted to his vast following that the deal was “on hold” while he awaited information on spam accounts, implying that the number might exceed 5%. This assertion led to a 9% drop in Twitter’s shares the following day. Soon after, Musk escalated his claims, estimating that bots and spam accounted for as much as 20% of users and demanding that the company prove otherwise. Critics speculate this move was aimed at either renegotiating the acquisition price or engineering a fall in stock value to justify backing out of the deal altogether.
The anticipated trial will proceed with a jury consisting of nine members and, notably, no alternates. This notable case poses unique challenges as it grapples with the intersection of celebrity, public opinion, and legal accountability within the tumultuous landscape of social media.
