Cards Against Humanity sued SpaceX yesterday, alleging that Elon Musk’s firm illegally took over a plot of land on the US/Mexico border that the party-game company bought in 2017 in an attempt to stymie then-President Trump’s attempt to build a wall.

“As part of CAH’s 2017 holiday campaign, while Donald Trump was President, CAH created a supporter-funded campaign to take a stand against the building of a Border Wall,” said the lawsuit filed in Cameron County District Court in Texas. Cards Against Humanity says it received $15 donations from 150,000 people and used part of that money to buy “a plot of vacant land in Cameron County based upon CAH’s promise to ‘make it as time-consuming and expensive as possible for Trump to build his wall.’”

Cards Against Humanity says it mowed the land “and maintained it in its natural state, marking the edge of the lot with a fence and a ‘No Trespassing’ sign.” But instead of Trump taking over the land, Cards Against Humanity says the parcel was “interfered with and invaded” by Musk’s space company. The lawsuit includes pictures that, according to Cards Against Humanity, show the land when it was first purchased and after SpaceX construction equipment and materials were placed on the land.

  • capital@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Hm… I don’t know what access to the property is like but, “lease” the land to someone, move an RV onto the land, arm him, then I’ll chip in to give SpaceX a hard time every damn day until they leave.

  • bradorsomething@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Musk also infringed on their digging a hole for yourself past the point of any reason, apparently wasting money just to expand the hole.

  • GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    ·
    6 hours ago

    If you’re an original 2017 CAH Saves America subscriber and you want to increase the pressure on Elon, here’s a thing you can post on Twitter (the platform he wants you to call “X” for his own sexual gratification):

    In 2017, I paid Cards Against Humanity to protect a pristine plot of border land from Trump’s racist wall. But then an even richer, more racist billionaire—Elon Musk—stole my land and dumped his shit all over it. @ElonMusk owes me $100. #ElonOwesMe100Bucks www.ElonOwesYou100Dollars.com

    Or if you’re not a subscriber, but you still think Elon Musk is a charity-embezzling, conspiracy-peddling eugenicist manchild who trades horses for in-flight handjobs, post this:

    In 2017, 150k people paid Cards Against Humanity to protect a pristine plot of border land from Trump’s racist wall. But then an even richer, more racist billionaire—@ElonMusk—stole their land and dumped his shit all over it. Fuck that! www.ElonOwesYou100Dollars.com #ElonOwesMe100Bucks

  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    7 hours ago

    This headline reads like a mad lib. Good luck CAH, I cannot wait to see how Elmo tries to act like he respects property rights while having done something like this

  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    164
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    So all I take from this is they took your money and did absolutely nothing with it to do anything to protect the land beyond marking it?

    Edit

    Our longstanding reputation as a company that makes outrageous promises and actually keeps them is on the line! We promised we’d use every legal tool at our disposal to protect this land from bullies like Trump and Musk (who’s spending millions to get Trump electedand also wants to build the stupid wall). If we don’t take action now, why would anyone ever trust us again?

    Maybe because you didn’t do anything to actually do what you said…?

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 hours ago

      You really think a billionaire should be able to take your land and property as long as they think you’re not using it correctly? You really want that precedent? That’s the kind of country you want to live in? It’s kind of Freedom you want to enjoy?

    • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      If they put up a fence and mowed the lawn as they claim, then that’s more than what they legally need to do to not be considered absentee owners.

    • silasmariner@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      121
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      One might argue that ‘doing nothing’ with land was an extremely good way of protecting it, but one would have to be talking to someone who was operating in good faith if they were to bother to do so…

      • towerful@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        46
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        The only way to look after land is to build a parking lot or use it to add another lane to a 32 lane highway.
        You can get off with just a fine if you dig up the land and put down lawn turf. The fine is reduced if you use 5 gallons a day of water to keep it green.

        (/s)

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        102
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        Just buying land does what? Show a presence, if they mowed it how often like they claimed it wouldn’t have gotten that bad before noticing. Put an actual fence on it, what they use? Some stakes a twine? I’m having a discussion so we can figure these details out, what are you doing than insulting someone for trying to talk?

        This also is t he first time they failed in their expectations, the hole they dug was a failure, they had to constantly modify their claim because they didn’t realize they rules and regulations regarding making. A safe deep excavation.

        I’m trying to discuss in good faith, the fuck is this? I provided a quote to show my particular issue and described it, what part of my comment is not trying to discuss in good faith? If anything you going straight to insulting someone is the one lacking any sort of civility here.

        • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          3 hours ago

          if they mowed it how often like they claimed it wouldn’t have gotten that bad before noticing

          I’m not so sure about this. Say they visited and did maintenance once a month - a construction crew only needs a couple days to trample over an area and dump a bunch of construction materials on top of it.

          I’m sure the legal case will come down to what Texas law requires a person to do with their land to be considered to be using it, and whether or not SpaceX did their due diligence to make sure they weren’t messing up anyone else’s land with their construction. It’s possible that all of this was an accident, but I don’t think that SpaceX deserves the benefit of the doubt.

          also

          the hole they dug was a failure

          lmao it was a hole in the ground that they dug as a marketing gimmick what more do you want.

        • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          4 hours ago

          If I buy land, it’s my land. My use (or lack thereof) is of no consequence to anybody; in other words, if I buy land, you can’t use it without my permission.

          CAH is not in the wrong here; SpaceX is. Yet you’re victim blaming CAH because you think they’re not doing enough to lay claim to their land?

          You’re not arguing in Good Faith. You’re trolling. Good faith would require you actually having understood the situation before making your weak accusations.

        • Deceptichum@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          96
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Buying land gives them the legal ownership of it, allowing them to stop others using it.

          Why do you assume they need to build something on the land?

          • FireTower@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            5 hours ago

            The US federal government could simply file for eminent domain on the land (pay the holder what they (feds) deem fair value) and build the wall CAH planned to disrupt.

            • moody@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              24
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Their goal was to make it as difficult as possible. Sure eminent domain was a possibility, but they expected it and I imagine planned to fight it.

              • FireTower@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                No I was talking about the base idea of buying land on the border to prevent Trump from building a wall while he was in office.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            75
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            That did a good job didn’t it? Plenty of ample evidence that worked eh?

            Did I say they need to build anything on it? How did you get that from my comment?

            • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              ·
              edit-2
              44 minutes ago

              Why are you complaining about what they did when it’s someone else that illegally used land that they didn’t own?

              If you own a plot of land you’re free to use it by doing fuck all with it, it doesn’t give anyone the right to use it and it doesn’t mean you’re being irresponsible by not doing anything including not putting up a fence, it’s other people’s responsibility to make sure they respect the limit of the property they own.

              • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                59
                ·
                edit-2
                7 hours ago

                Yes that can go on the border, and almost every farmer knows to do this to prevent people like hunters from accidentally using your land.

                You can’t just buy land and expect people to not use it, that’s almost negligence for anyone who spent their money expecting CAH to do this, if anything they’ve opened themselves to be sued by the people who spent the money doing this in the first place.

                • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  56
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 hours ago

                  Your thoughts on land ownership are making me chuckle a lil.

                  Guess what, there’s actually a government program in some agricultural areas, that pays landowners money to literally do nothing with their land, so it can act as a sanctuary for wildlife. Doing nothing with land is perfectly legal and sometimes even encouraged.

                  Now, owning and doing nothing with HOUSES is downright immoral, yet we don’t fine those people either.

                  They put up a No Trespassing sign. With Texas castle laws, idk if they even needed to do that and they can literally shoot trespassers on their property.

                • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  48
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 hours ago

                  Cards Against Humanity says it mowed the land “and maintained it in its natural state, marking the edge of the lot with a fence and a ‘No Trespassing’ sign.”

                  /edit: lmao.

        • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          44
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          Just buying land gives complete legal ownership and stewardship to the owner. They’re not obligated to do shit with it, and they bought it exactly so they could do nothing with it: keep it natural and pristine.

          You seem to weirdly be invested in Cards Against Humanity being in the wrong, with the weird takes. They did exactly what they were expected to do- keep it pristine. What gives you any impression at all there were different expectations? Just flat out wrong.

          Your whole comment reads like one of Musk’s alt accounts trying to rub defense lol. If you expressed any semblance of understanding why and how CAH acquired the land before you began with “this isn’t the first time they failed expectations, why didn’t they build anything?!,” maybe you’d get better replies

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            55
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Just buying land gives complete legal ownership and stewardship to the owner. They’re not obligated to shit with it, and they bought it exactly so they could do nothing with it: keep it natural and pristine.

            Squatters and adverse possession says otherwise… they also didn’t just claim they would keep it natural and pristine, they claimed they would protect it.

            Governments can also force you to sell your land….

            You seem to weirdly be invested in Cards Against Humanity being in the wrong, with the weird takes. They did exactly what they were expected to do- keep it pristine. What gives you any impression at all there were different expectations? Just flat out wrong.

            What? They said they would protect it from billionaires, they failed on that didn’t they? Just like their deep hole they couldn’t do.

            Your whole comment reads like one of Musk’s alt accounts trying to rub defense lol. If you expressed any semblance of understanding why and how CAH acquired the land before you began with “this isn’t the first time they failed expectations, why didn’t they build anything?!,” maybe you’d get better replies

            I do understand how they got the land, why do you claim I don’t?

            They have failed before.

            Where did I say they need to build something? I have gotten better replies, thank you, you’re just a piece of work apparently.

            • stonerboner@lemmynsfw.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              41
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Absolutely bonkers lmao

              Of course imminent domain exists, silly. Yes, the government can force sales. Also squatters can be forcefully evicted through due process by the owner. That’s now what’s happening here. I can’t even begin to understand why it’s relevant.

              Protecting the land means not letting it become part of the failed Wall, and not allowing building/dumping on it. As Elon has dumped his shit in their land, CaH is suing. Thats exactly what protecting the land is, buddy.

              You seem to have a chub for Elon, or a chip against CaH. Not sure which, but you are waaaay off base lol

            • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              23
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Squatters and adverse possession says otherwise

              Adverse possession requires someone to use the land in an exclusive and conspicuous manner for an extended period of time without the owner challenging them on it.

              They are literally challenging SpaceX on it, right now at this very moment. That’s the entire point.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Why do conservatives never want to conserve anything?

          Not developing land is a good thing for the planet and our species.

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            45
            ·
            7 hours ago

            You don’t need to develop land to protect it, farmers use fences, it lets people know like hunters to not use their land. You also kinda need a presence, or even your neighbor will use your l as if they notice you’re never there….

            • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Holy shit I’m glad you’re not my neighbor. With your understanding in place I’d go out of town for work and come back to you building a palace for your erotic Lego Luigi sculptures on my porch.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              38
              ·
              6 hours ago

              You know what lets people know it’s your land? A map. Also, county records.

              You know how hunters know not to use your land? They don’t own it and didn’t get permission.

              Seriously, have you never met a hunter before? They’re not a bunch of morons. They don’t want to get fined or arrested or, worse, shot for trespassing.

              Also, this is utter nonsense:

              You also kinda need a presence, or even your neighbor will use your l as if they notice you’re never there….

              The houses on either side of mine are empty. One was foreclosed on, the other’s owner died and no one has taken over the house. I wish someone would use their land. At least the grass would get mowed.

              There are entire towns that are virtually empty. They don’t have people just come in and start illegally developing land and no one cares.

    • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It’s their land. What more should be required to stop people from dumping their crap on it?

      By which I mean, not “what would have stopped them?”, as fences, armed guards and tanks may have stopped them.

      I mean, “what is the minimum requirement to ensure land isn’t filled with other people’s, or companies, stuff?”

      For me, if they want to store stuff on some land, they should make sure they own it first.

      • watson387@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        5 hours ago

        In the heavy construction industry you always make sure you have a local plot of land for idle equipment, material storage, office trailers, etc. before you start a project. You have to pay for that shit though and you generally have to leave it the way you found it or better. You can’t just park your equipment on someone else’s land and expect everything to be OK. Everyone performing any type of large project knows this. This lawsuit would have happened no matter who owned the land.

        • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          You’re right, but this is out in the middle of nowhere. I’m not surprised a megacorp would just dump their shit wherever. It’s probably cheaper paying the occasional fine or court case than going about it the legal way.

        • WalnutLum@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Expecting a company that blew up their own rocket pad and falsified EPA documents to think ahead is too much for them apparently.

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      I don’t know why people are downvoting you. At the very least, it seems like they didn’t even check on the land for years. Notice it’s a 2017 photo and a 2024 one. No progress pics in the middle, no “we told them to stop on X and Y date and here’s photos of them continuing”.

      They abandoned the property for years because all they cared about was squatting on the wall being built, which by having the deed they were doing. They didn’t do anything further because that was never their goal.

      So honestly, while what Elon did is shitty and illegal, them trying to claim the some moral high ground by acting like it was an environmental sanctuary is disingenuous. In fairness, the original purpose of stopping the wall from being built is STILL being upheld. Elon’s not building the wall there as far as I can tell. Just storing junk(that CAD should just scrap and sell since it’s abandoned on their lot). Heavy machinery is worth a lot…

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Preserving land in its natural state is that simple, not touching it. Trespassing and using someone else’s property is illegal. What are you arguing here? I can’t just go store shit on my neighbor’s back yard and say, well he wasn’t using it, and he just didn’t want a wall to be built there and I didn’t build a wall so its fine

        • fishos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 hour ago

          Did I say it wasn’t illegal? I literally said it is.

          What I’m saying is CAD is pretending they were protecting the environment when in fact all they were doing was squatting a land title. They didn’t actually check on the land at all, which is something you might expect of someone who was actually trying to protect the land and wasn’t just pulling a big publicity stunt.

          So yeah, what I’m saying is the other guy is right: theyre making a big show of saying they care about the land after the fact, but before then did jackcall shit and never even checked on it.

          Elon can be a shithead and CAD could have just been doing a publicity stunt. Both can be true

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 hours ago

      They put up a fence around it, and now they’re suing somebody for trespassing on it.

    • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Well, they are suing the richest man on the planet in order to protect it. That can’t be cheap.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      Nah. They bought the land so they could use it for a promotional event.

      And now they are using it for another promotional event.


      In all fairness, CAHcorp (whatever their business name is) are pretty much the epitome of “dumbass white liberals”. Right down to how they are so adamant about “humor” that is just white guys saying racial slurs and talking about dead babies and thinking it is the funniest shit ever. So I can easily see them thinking that just owning the land was all they needed to do because nobody would ever violate the law or ignore their rights.

      I mean, just look at all the replies that boil down to Arthur the aardvark saying “but musk broke the rules!!!”


      Also: This never really would have stopped trump’s wall. Eminent domain would have kicked in (basically what spacex tried) and they would have gotten a pennies on the dollar check and told to go fuck themselves.

      • MutilationWave@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I used your dead baby’s finger to type this comment. It was hard at first but then I realized I just had to cut off the rest of the baby and just use the finger. I was tired, cut me some slack.

        Wait this isn’t your baby… it’s… impossible… A virgin birth! Hallelujah!

      • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        was all they needed to do because nobody would ever violate the law or ignore their rights.

        They are suing the people who violated the law and ignored their rights right now. What should they have done instead?