SAN FRANCISCO (Azat TV) – Elon Musk testified in a San Francisco court on March 6, 2026, defending his past tweets related to the acquisition of Twitter and alleging that the Delaware judge overseeing the original deal was ‘biased’ against him. This marks the first time Musk has made such claims in court, forming a key part of his defense in an ongoing class action lawsuit.
The lawsuit, which seeks to represent Twitter shareholders who sold their stock between May 13 and October 4, 2022, claims that Musk’s public statements and tweets regarding Twitter’s bot accounts caused the company’s stock price to fall. Investors allege these actions violated federal securities laws and led to significant financial losses for them.
Musk’s Defense and Judicial Bias Allegation
During his testimony, Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, maintained that he was compelled to pay the full $44 billion acquisition price for Twitter in 2022 due to the alleged bias of Kathaleen St. J. McCormick, the chief judge of the Delaware Chancery Court. Judge McCormick had overseen Twitter’s lawsuit to force Musk to complete the acquisition at the agreed-upon price of $54.20 per share.
Musk has previously vocalized his criticisms of the Delaware Chancery Court and its chief judge outside of court, but his recent testimony directly within the San Francisco legal proceedings represents a significant escalation of these claims. His lawyers aim to use this argument to explain his actions and statements leading up to the acquisition.
Allegations of Twitter Stock Manipulation
The core of the class action lawsuit centers on the accusation that Musk intentionally manipulated Twitter’s stock price. Plaintiffs allege that his repeated public statements and tweets about the prevalence of bot and fake accounts on the platform were calculated to drive down the company’s valuation. This, they argue, was an attempt either to abandon the deal entirely or to renegotiate a lower purchase price.
Musk defended his assertions about bot accounts, stating that the problem of bots was not new and that Twitter itself had previously settled claims regarding overstating its growth rate and user figures. He reportedly characterized his claims that bot numbers were high—potentially 20% or more—as akin to ‘saying the grass is green or the sky is blue,’ implying it was a widely known issue.
Implications for Social Media Executives and Investor Trust
The outcome of this class action lawsuit holds substantial financial implications for Elon Musk and could establish a significant legal precedent for social media executives. It raises questions about the extent of responsibility executives bear for their public statements, particularly on platforms they own or are in the process of acquiring, and how these statements can impact shareholder value.
Legal experts suggest that a ruling in favor of the investors could lead to substantial damages and reinforce the legal framework around corporate transparency and executive conduct in the digital age. Conversely, a ruling favoring Musk could embolden executives to speak more freely, even if their statements are perceived as controversial or market-moving. The San Francisco court is expected to continue hearing arguments as the complex legal battle unfolds.
This ongoing litigation underscores the intricate challenges of high-stakes corporate acquisitions, especially when intertwined with the public persona and social media activity of prominent figures like Elon Musk, potentially reshaping expectations for executive accountability.