The 9 Libel-by-AI Cases in the U.S. Since 2023 (6 Still Going Forward)

Read the original at Reason ↗
Cite

Volokh, E. (2026, September 14). The 9 Libel-by-AI Cases in the U.S. Since 2023 (6 Still Going Forward). Reason. https://reason.com/volokh/2026/09/14/the-9-libel-by-ai-cases-in-the-u-s-since-2023-6-still-going-forward/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Reason · collected 2026-09-14 · by Eugene Volokh

Quick Summary

Since 2023, nine libel-by-AI cases have occurred in the United States, with six still active as of the latest update. Cases include Walters vs. OpenAI, which resulted in no liability due to unique circumstances; Battle vs. Microsoft Corp., resolved through arbitration; and Starbuck v. Meta Platforms, settled out of court. Other ongoing lawsuits involve Google and X.AI, where plaintiffs claim false and reputation-damaging content generated by AI systems.
Written by AI on 2026-09-14, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

In 2023, there have been 9 libel-by-AI cases initiated against tech giants like Google LLC and OpenAI. As of now, 6 of these cases are still ongoing. Notable among them is Starbuck v. Google (Del. Super.) and LTL LED, LLC v. Google LLC (Minn. Dist.), where motions to dismiss were denied, allowing the cases to proceed further. Another significant case is Keene v. Google LLC (N.D. Ill.), involving author Jimmy Keene, who alleges that Google's AI repeatedly published false overviews about him from May 24 to June 27, 2025, stating he was serving life sentences for multiple crimes and drug trafficking, despite his conviction being expunged years ago. This case is significant as it highlights the potential legal repercussions of misinformation spread by AI technologies.

Written for “Libel by AI Cases” on 2026-10-30, grounded in this article and the 1 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Libel by AI Cases
Politics · 2 article(s) covering the same event. See how they differ ↓

Compared with similar articles

This article reads unscored and hedges 33% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Semafor
Hedges 1 of 32 claims Outlet record 60/100
“Article A lists several libel-by-AI cases and their outcomes, while Article B discusses AI companies' stance on regulation in Washington. They do not describe the same specific incident.”
New York Post
⚖️ Leans right Hedges 1 of 31 claims Outlet record 66/100
“Article A discusses specific libel cases involving AI since 2023, while Article B contains letters to the editor about general concerns and calls for regulation of AI technology.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
3
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
33%
1 of 3 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
not political
takes no side on a contested political question
Publisher signals
67/100
Reason's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
2
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-14 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Reason · 1015 article(s) · 4 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 4 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Eugene Volokh
167 article(s) here · 0 carrying a prediction
🔮 The hope would be to siphon votes away from Sullivan.
🔮 Defendants observe that Alibaba is not completely banned from appearing before the federal government—it could hire more in-house lobbyists or find a firm that is willing to forgo defense contractor clients….
🔮 Still others predicted that someone would eventually remove the context and circulate the resulting footage as though Mr. Piker had been speaking sincerely.
2026-10-27 · assertive framing · Hasan Piker Sues Scott Jennings
🔮 The Indictment alleges that Holmes posted on that account several statements against the Jewish community and Israel, including: "The jew will be destroyed and discarded," "From the river to the sea every Jew will die," "You inbred people will all die," and "Die Jew."
🔮 When reviewing whether the evidence was sufficient to support the issuance [or extension] of a 258E order, we consider [consistently with the statutory requirements] whether, "by a preponderance of the evidence, together with all permissible inferences," the judge could have found "that the defendant had committed '[three] or more acts of willful and malicious conduct aimed at a specific person committed with the intent to cause fear, intimidation, abuse or damage to property and that [did] in fact cause fear, intimidation, abuse or damage to property.'"
🔮 The Volokh Conspiracy Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent New from Reason: a look into what Javier Milei has accomplished and what it will take to make the most of Argentina’s window for real change.
2026-10-25 · assertive framing · Open Thread
🔮 The Volokh Conspiracy Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent New from Reason: a look into what Javier Milei has accomplished and what it will take to make the most of Argentina’s window for real change.
2026-10-24 · assertive framing · Open Thread
🔮 The original TRO—the one actually issued on July 20, 2025—named as plaintiffs eleven individuals and organizations who had never been party to the case; named as defendants two officials who were not actually sued; claimed, without evidence, that three post-secondary institutions had already cancelled DEI initiatives or programming because of the act; further declared, again without evidence, that staff at another school had been told not to discuss certain topics, including "historical interpretations involving systemic racism"; misquoted H.B. 1193 as applying to "race or sex stereotyping," "race or sex scapegoating," "critical race theory," and "institutional bias," despite none of these terms' appearing in the act's text; and referenced purported declarations of four individuals who do not appear in the record at all and may not even exist….
🔮 Critics fear that the Department of Justice's antitrust division will overlook mergers when it is convenient for the administration.
🔮 Body armor may be used more today than Defendants' understanding of its use in 1791.
2026-10-21 · assertive framing · Body Armor Ban Struck Down by N.Y. Federal Court
Also by Eugene Volokh
Hasan Piker Sues Scott Jennings
2026-10-27 · Reason
Open Thread
2026-10-27 · Reason
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 167 articles by Eugene Volokh →

Topics

Ga. Super. Google Google LLC Openai, L.L.C. Super.

Subjects

Google LLC ORG · 3× Google ORG · 2× Grybniak ORG · 2× Starbuck PERSON · 2× Super. GPE · 2× Battle PERSON · 1× Ga. Super. GPE · 1× Microsoft Corp. ORG · 1× Openai, L.L.C. ORG · 1× Walters PERSON · 1×

Narrative

- Starbuck v. Google (Del. Super.): Motion to dismiss denied, case can go forward. - LTL LED, LLC v. Google LLC (Minn. Dist.): Case going forward, Google failed to properly get the case removed to federal court.
framing: mixed · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-14

Claims (3 extracted, 1 hedged)

- Starbuck v. Meta Platforms (Del. Super.): Settled. - Keene v. Google LLC (N.D. Ill.): Motion to dismiss denied, case can go forward. asserted
case → settle → Platforms
- Starbuck v. Google (Del. Super.): Motion to dismiss denied, case can go forward. - LTL LED, LLC v. Google LLC (Minn. Dist.): Case going forward, Google failed to properly get the case removed to federal court. asserted
case → dismiss → court
For a case that alleges false and reputation-damaging hallucinations but that doesn't include a defamation claim, see Doe v. OpenAI Found. (Cal. Super. Ct.); there also hasn't been judicial action there. uncertain
that → allege → Doe
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support