Musk heads to trial in San Francisco, but finding neutral jurors just got complicated

21. Únor 2026 v 12:15

A federal judge had to cut a significant portion of a jury pool in San Francisco after potential jurors said they held strong opinions about Tesla CEO Elon Musk, as reported by SFGATE. The responses complicated jury selection for Musk’s upcoming civil trial.

The case centers on Musk’s conduct during his 2022 acquisition of X, formerly Twitter. Investors allege he violated securities laws by delaying required disclosures and making misleading statements that affected the company’s stock price, claims Musk denies.

During roughly five hours of jury selection for a nine-person jury, court questionnaires and in-court questioning repeatedly surfaced opinions about Musk, his companies, and his political views. When Judge Charles Breyer asked whether anyone could not set aside their biases, about three dozen people raised their hands and were removed from the pool.

Strong opinions about Musk shaped the jury pool

Judge Breyer told jurors they would need to decide the case strictly on the evidence presented in court. Courtroom rules and enforcement have also been in focus lately, including smart glasses in court. Even so, some prospective jurors described views that suggested they could not be impartial, prompting additional dismissals.

Nine jurors, claiming they can be fair and impartial to Elon Musk and his controversial purchase of Twitter in 2022, were seated in San Francisco federal court Thursday, whittled down from a pool of 93. https://t.co/C0gfdjcH7S
— Bloomberg Law (@BLaw) February 20, 2026

One candidate said they would feel “morally obligated to convict” in a criminal trial but claimed they could put those views aside for a civil case. The same person said it would benefit humanity for Musk to be sent to prison and argued that a large civil loss would not matter to him, and they were not selected.

Other prospective jurors described Musk as having “no moral compass” or accused him of using his wealth to influence votes. The judge also dismissed candidates who objected to the existence of billionaires or cited Musk’s decisions related to content moderation at X as reasons for their views.

Musk’s attorney, Stephen Broome, argued for more candidates to be removed based on questionnaire responses, citing concerns about bias in the pool. Separate scrutiny around political influence has also surfaced in headlines, including Meta political spend targets. Breyer acknowledged that Musk, as a public figure, “will excite views, strong views,” and said the core issue was whether jurors could set those views aside and be fair.