X is defending its users' anonymity rights against Andrew and Tristan Tate, far-right influencers and accused human traffickers, who aim to reveal the identities of their online critics.

The Tate brothers launched a lawsuit last year against owners of over a dozen social media accounts - many operating under pseudonyms - alleging a "Conspiratorial Plot" to defame them. A Florida court ruled that claims could not proceed against unidentified parties, prompting amended complaints against known users and a separate filing against X to compel disclosure of anonymous account holders. Last month, counsel for the anonymous Doe defendants sought a protective order to shield their personal details. On May 11, X filed an opposition, highlighting multiple legal flaws and arguing that the demand threatens First Amendment protections.

The filing states: "The United States Supreme Court has long upheld the right to anonymous speech on the internet, including social media platforms." While not unlimited, it argues the lawsuit fails to meet necessary First Amendment thresholds to avoid chilling speech and discouraging participation in public discourse due to fears of exposure for controversial views.

The targeted accounts monitored legal proceedings against Andrew Tate, a self-described misogynist facing rape and human trafficking charges in the UK and Romania, along with his brother, accused of similar offenses. The brothers reject all allegations. Their initial complaint cited purportedly defamatory posts labeling Andrew Tate a "compulsive liar" and "groomer." Neither X nor the Tates' attorney responded promptly to comment requests.

This dispute divides MAGA-aligned groups

This dispute divides MAGA-aligned groups. The Tate brothers returned to the US in 2025, reportedly aided by the Trump administration. X owner Elon Musk, occasionally a Trump ally, previously amplified their reach by restoring Tate's account in 2022 post-acquisition. Yet Musk champions himself - contentiously - as a free speech advocate while cracking down on perceived doxing. The Tates' pursuit of user data to silence critics appears to undermine both stances.

Nathan Pope, known online as Gadget, was initially referenced only by pseudonym in the brothers' suit before being named outright in amendments. Pope, who uses his real name publicly, told The Verge via email: "I am especially worried about recent moves to expose anonymous defendants, particularly with the Tates' statements on using courts against critics and doxing identities online. This sparks wider fears of harassment and how such suits suppress online expression."

"Anonymous speech falls under First Amendment protections, extending to the internet, with courts often shielding online posters from unmasking as the Constitution demands," explained internet law expert Cathy Gellis in an email to The Verge. In practice, outcomes vary due to challenges like securing timely, affordable legal help for anonymous parties. Platforms sometimes intervene to block such disclosures and safeguard communities, though it's not always practical.

Pope noted the heavy financial burden of defense, funded via crowdfunding. "I'm glad X is contesting this and upholding the right to critique public figures without legal intimidation."