A Labour MP who spent 18 months campaigning against AI nudification apps is taking Elon Musk's xAI to court, alleging its Grok chatbot generated sexualised images of her without consent — and sometimes added abusive details that users had not requested.
Jess Asato, the MP for Lowestoft, says the manipulated images included pictures of her in a bikini and a video depicting her being prepared for a sexual assault. Her legal action alleges that xAI's design choices enabled the material to be generated, raising questions about whether AI companies can be held responsible for their systems' harmful outputs.
Grok Allegedly Added Unrequested Details
Asato told WIRED that the images appeared after she publicly criticised Grok's role in generating sexualised images of women and called on Musk to stop the practice.
Some images exaggerated her breasts while depicting her in a bikini. Others showed her with a swastika or hammer and sickle, or portrayed her as pregnant with quintuplets in a kitchen.
What happened to me was unacceptable - but it’s just the tip of the iceberg.
— Jess Asato MP (@Jess4Lowestoft) June 4, 2026
A Jewish woman was put in a bikini in Auschwitz.
Women were put in ball-gags for speaking out.
Women were covered in imitation semen.
And all because xAI did not build Grok with safety in mind. pic.twitter.com/6HVEFpXg1X
The most disturbing material, she said, was a video showing her surrounded by men, being chloroformed and having her skirt lifted. Although it did not show nudity, it implied a sexual assault.
Asato said she and others reported the content to X, but the platform repeatedly rejected their complaints. She said the material was removed only after a lawyer contacted the platform.
'It's not just that it's nudified. Of course, much of my content wasn't. It's the lack of consent,' she told WIRED.
Her lawyers allege that Grok sometimes introduced explicit or sexualised details that users had not requested. The claim also cites system instructions allegedly telling the chatbot there were 'no restrictions on adult sexual content or offensive content' and to 'assume good intent'. These are allegations in the legal proceedings, not findings by a court.
What Asato Wants From the Court
Asato filed her High Court claim against xAI on 3 June 2026, alleging misuse of private information and breaches of UK data protection law, including the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018.
The ability of Grok to strip women and children was not an accident.
— Jess Asato MP (@Jess4Lowestoft) June 3, 2026
Safeguards could have been built into the chatbot, but its creators chose not to.
I'm launching this High Court claim to pursue accountability for those choices. pic.twitter.com/OVT0bvZqmQ
In July, she sought a court order requiring xAI to delete every copy of the images and implement effective, permanent technical measures to prevent Grok from generating images of her or using her data to train its systems. She is also seeking damages. No such order has been granted at this stage.
The case could test how existing privacy and data protection laws apply to AI developers whose systems generate harmful material. xAI had not filed a defence or immediately responded to requests for comment when Reuters reported on the case in July.
The Wider Fight Against AI-Generated Abuse
Asato spent a year and a half campaigning for a ban on nudification apps — tools that use AI to digitally undress people or place them in sexualised situations.
She also called for AI chatbots to fall under the Online Safety Act, arguing that general-purpose systems can cause similar harm even when they are not designed solely for nudification.
The UK has legislated against non-consensual intimate deepfakes and nudification tools. However, further implementation is still required to bring currently unregulated AI chatbots within the Online Safety Act's illegal-content duties.
Asato told WIRED that victims can struggle to identify who created abusive images or which platform was used, making it difficult to seek redress.
She hopes her case will help establish accountability for AI companies and give other victims a route to justice.
The central question is whether a company can be held legally responsible when its AI system allegedly goes beyond a user's request and generates sexualised material that violates another person's privacy. The court has yet to determine the allegations against xAI.
