I've only read the SEC's motion (https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ragxTxYirOxo/v0 https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ragxTxY

I've only read the SEC's motion (https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ragxTxYirOxo/v0 https://assets.bwbx.io/documents/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/ragxTxYi...). I haven't been able to track down the court's final judgement document in the settlement. That said, I don't agree with your portrayal here. The SEC's claim is just that Musk didn't pre-clear the tweet, which was a court-backed requirement in the settlement, which makes him in contempt of court. The other stuff, like about the TV interview, is evidence that he's not acting in good faith, so the court shouldn't cut him slack here - or, in the motion's words, that he "has not made a diligent or good faith effort to comply with the provision of the Court’s Final Judgment requiring pre-approval of his written communications about Tesla. Less than two months after the Court entered its Final Judgment, Musk publicly indicated that he was not serious about compliance with this provision."