A federal judge ordered Missouri's MAGA attorney general to halt an investigation into Media Matters for America, which earned Elon Musk's wrath when it published an article showing that Musk's X platform placed advertisements next to pro-Nazi posts. Via Ars Technica:

In March, Missouri AG Andrew Bailey issued an investigative demand seeking names and addresses of all Media Matters donors who live in Missouri and a range of internal communications and documents regarding the group's research on Musk and X. Bailey also filed a lawsuit asking Cole County Circuit Court for an order to enforce the investigative demand.

Media Matters countered by suing Bailey in US District Court for the District of Columbia. Last week, US District Judge Amit Mehta granted a preliminary injunction that prohibits Bailey from enforcing the civil investigative demand and from pursuing the related lawsuit.

Mehta had issued a similar order against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton a few months earlier. Mehta filed a memorandum opinion on August 23 describing the reasons for granting Media Matters' request for an injunction against Bailey.

Media Matters demonstrated a likelihood of success in its claim that Bailey took retaliatory actions designed to deter speech, Mehta wrote.

Poor Elmo. World's richest man is so angry that people are blaming him for ruining the bird site. Wahh! Wahh!

Media Matters provides these key takeaways from the order:

• As Judge Mehta noted, Media Matters was the target of politically motivated “retaliation” by law enforcement that “chilled” our “protected expression” and First Amendment rights.
• The U.S. District Court also affirmed that Media Matters’ reporting is “protected speech” and has been corroborated by other media outlets and even X Corp.
• According to Judge Mehta “‘the most heinous act in which a democratic government can engage is to use its law enforcement machinery for political ends.’ … That apparently is what has occurred here.”
• The U.S. District Court affirmed that AG Bailey’s own “public statements are direct evidence of retaliatory intent” against Media Matters, and “retaliation for protected expression was likely his true motive for investigating Media Matters.”