The New York Times (Lean Left bias) reported Elon Musk met with Iran’s ambassador to the United Nations days after the 2024 presidential election, which some say would violate federal law. Here’s what you need to know and how different media have covered it.

This claim is purported by two anonymous Iranian officials, who, as The New York Times reports, “were not authorized to discuss policy publicly.” At this time, there’s no hard evidence of a meeting taking place, and no public confirmation from U.S. or Iranian officials.

The federal law in question is the Logan Act, which prohibits any citizen of the U.S without authority to “directly or indirectly…[carry on] any correspondence…with any foreign government…with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States…”

In the case of Musk’s alleged meeting with the ambassador, if the anonymous sources were not allowed to speak on policy publicly, and if they believe the meeting was a way to work around the U.S. government, then they imply Musk not only spoke about policy, but also engaged in the conversations as a private citizen, not as a federal employee or citizen with United States authorization. 

Additionally, The New York Times said the discussion between Musk and the ambassador served as a “workaround for Iran, allowing it to avoid sitting directly with an American official.” The New York Times also reports, “One Iranian Foreign Ministry official said Ambassador Iravani told Mr. Musk during the meeting that he should obtain sanctions exemptions from the Treasury and bring some of his businesses to Tehran.”

It is worth noting that while there is witness testimony to the alleged meeting between Musk and the ambassador, the validity of these witnesses is hampered by the anonymity of the claims. Therefore, at this point, there’s no evidence Musk committed a crime. 

The New York Times writes, “Asked about whether there was such a session, Steven Cheung, Mr. Trump’s communications director, said, ‘We do not comment on reports of private meetings that did or did not occur.’ Mr. Musk did not respond to a request for comment.”

Coverage of the Alleged Crime

CBS (Lean Left bias) writes that while Musk had allegedly met with the Iran ambassador, there was “no indication that President-elect Donald Trump’s national security transition team was aware of the meeting.” This implies that if Musk did meet with the ambassador, he lacked authorization from Trump, and therefore may have broken the law, as he would have acted as a private citizen engaging in conversations with foreign governments, not as a government official. 

CBS also says,“American companies are largely forbidden from doing business in Iran due to extensive sanctions. The U.S. considers Iran to be the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism.” This pushes a narrative of potential corruption on Musk’s part, with him being a major entrepreneur supposedly offered to do some business in Tehran. CBS also highlights the fact that Iran is seen as a major sponsor of terrorism to serve the “disputes and controversies" section of the Logan Act, effectively framing Musk’s alleged conversations with the Iran ambassador as under the law's jurisdiction. 

X user Tristan Snell, lawyer and legal commentator who’s been featured on MSNBC (Left bias), posted: “If reports are true, this was a FEDERAL FELONY.” “If” being the operative word, as naturally, if the reports are true, then Elon Musk may face the legal ramifications of breaking a federal law. 

Breitbart (Right bias) added, “Trump has pursued a dual strategy with Iran, threatening on the one hand to allow Israel to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, while at the same time saying that he wants a new agreement with Iran…” This provides additional context about Trump’s diplomacy style when dealing with Iran in particular, giving credence to the broader claim that Elon Musk is playing a role in this diplomatic strategy by providing the amicable arm to Trump’s strongarm tactics.

Fox Business (Lean Right bias) brought on General Jack Keane, a senior strategic analyst for Fox News, to comment on Musk’s alleged meeting with Iran’s UN ambassador. When asked if he approves of Musk’s alleged discussions with the ambassador, Gen. Jack Keane states, “Well, obviously, he is not an official of the United States government, but he is an advisor to the President-elect.” He added, “So, I think [Trump’s] using a close advisor of his, someone who he trusts, to do a little bit of that, to set the stage for him.” 

This perspective from the right does not refute the claim that Musk met with the ambassador, as Keane even mentioned Musk is not a United States official. Instead of delving into the potential legal ramifications of this reality, Gen. Jack Keane defends the meeting as a way for Trump to start negotiations with Iran before he is even in office. 

Previous Claims

As Fortune (Center) highlights, when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy called President-elect Donald Trump to congratulate him on his victory, Elon Musk was reportedly put on the call. It’s worth noting that in this case, the anonymous source mentions that “Musk did not appear to be on the line for the entire conversation…” As such, Musk being involved in conversations with a foreign government leader is unlikely to draw scrutiny under the Logan Act. 

Reuters (Center) said, “Reports that billionaire Elon Musk has held multiple calls with Russian officials, including President Vladimir Putin, should be investigated by the Pentagon and law-enforcement agencies on national-security grounds, two senior Democratic senators said in a letter seen by Reuters on Friday.” The rising concerns in the Democratic party over Musk's previously reported conversation with Russia could be interpreted as a political ploy, as Musk has recently been nominated to lead the new Department of Government Efficiency or “DOGE” advisory group.

There is a pattern displayed, with Musk being increasingly involved in discussions with foreign governments, either at the behest of Trump or through his own actions. Rising concerns are largely due to Musk’s new role in Trump’s presidency and his current role as owner of X, Starlink, and SpaceX, all of which may raise concerns over national security. However, the very nature and intent of the conversations and meetings are not known nor confirmed by either party, and thus concerns remain just that — speculation. 

Conclusion

As sources have been anonymous in both Musk’s conversations with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and with the Iran Ambassador for the United Nations, there is no definitive answer as to whether Musk conducted these conversations concerning diplomatic discussions around easing tensions. As such, it is unsubstantiated in these cases to claim that Musk committed a federal crime. 

Emanuel Macuixtle is an AllSides content intern. He has a Left bias.

Reviewed and edited by Henry A. Brechter, editor-in-chief (Center bias) and Julie Mastrine, Director of Marketing and Bias Ratings (Lean Right).