Last week, Elon Musk asked a federal judge to make the Securities and Exchange Commission stop being mean to him by insisting he live up to the terms of agreement he signed with them that allowed him to remain CEO of Tesla. Specifically, he asked the judge to tell the SEC to stop asking questions about whether and how he and the company are or aren’t living up to said deal, which is now, four years after he voluntarily signed it and become inconceivably richer, apparently an intolerable imposition on his First Amendment right to spitball mark-moving information of Twitter in between tweets comparing world leaders to Hitler. To which the SEC has responded, “Really?”
“The commission’s enforcement staff have…sought to meet and confer with counsel for Tesla and Mr. Musk to address any concerns regarding Tesla and Mr. Musk’s compliance,” Steven Buchholz, a senior SEC official in San Francisco, wrote in the letter.
Perhaps recognizing in light of that fairly reasonable asserting that “stop bothering me, god!” was probably not a winning legal argument, Musk and Tesla have come up with another, one that, if it contains even a shred of truth, makes one wonder why it’s not what they led with.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk is escalating his battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission, accusing a staff member of illegally leaking the results of an investigation. Musk said the regulator is trying to "weaponize" an earlier consent decree he and Tesla signed "for illicit ends…."
Musk's lawyers disclosed that it has sent a letter to the agency's Inspector General requesting an investigation of the agency's conduct in its probes of Tesla and Musk.
For more of the latest in litigation, regulation, deals and financial services trends, sign up for Finance Docket, a partnership between Breaking Media publications Above the Law and Dealbreaker.