Arbitrary investigation of Grok/X

Priority question for written answer P-000463/2026
to the Commission
Rule 144
Marieke Ehlers (PfE), Sebastian Kruis (PfE)

The Commission has announced enforcement action against the social media platform X and its AI tool Grok, citing concerns related to AI-generated images and alleged risks under the Digital Services Act. This action has been presented as exceptional and urgent.

However, it is beyond dispute that image manipulation and the creation of misleading or harmful images have been possible for decades, using widely available software such as Photoshop. For years, even 14-year-olds have been technically capable of producing comparable manipulated images, and this has not triggered EU enforcement action against the providers of the tools.

At the same time, numerous AI tools currently operating in the EU offer image-generation capabilities identical to Grok's, yet remain untouched by comparable Commission action.

In this context:

• 1.What objective, technical or legal criteria distinguish Grok from other image-generation tools, including long-standing software capable of producing the same outputs, and thus justify this selective enforcement?
• 2.Does the Commission accept that targeting one platform while tolerating functionally equivalent tools undermines the principles of equal treatment, proportionality and legal certainty under EU law?
• 3.Given that the owner of X has publicly criticised the Commission, can the Commission categorically deny that political disagreement has influenced its decision to single out X and Grok?

Submitted: 5.2.2026