On November 21, 2025, the long-awaited release of nearly 1,400 pages of emails between the office of Texas Governor Greg Abbott and billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk’s companies finally landed in the hands of The Texas Newsroom. But what was supposed to be a revealing look into the relationship between one of the world’s most influential businessmen and the leadership of America’s second-largest state turned out to be almost entirely shrouded in secrecy. Of the 1,374 pages provided, all but about 200 were completely blacked out, with the few readable documents offering little in the way of insight or substance.
The journey to this anticlimactic disclosure began months earlier, when Texas news outlets, led by The Texas Newsroom—a collaboration between NPR and Texas public radio stations—filed a public records request for communications between Governor Abbott’s office and employees of Musk’s companies, including SpaceX, Tesla, X (formerly Twitter), and Neuralink. The request, filed on April 20, 2025, was part of an effort to track Musk’s growing clout in the Texas Capitol, as he has moved many of his businesses’ headquarters to the state and successfully lobbied for new laws beneficial to his enterprises.
After The Texas Newsroom paid the required $244.64 fee to review the documents, the legal wrangling began in earnest. Lawyers representing both Abbott’s office and SpaceX fought to keep the emails secret, arguing that their release would reveal trade secrets, contain confidential legal and policymaking discussions, or include exchanges that were “intimate and embarrassing.” According to reporting from The Texas Newsroom, Abbott’s public information coordinator, Matthew Taylor, specifically cited “common-law privacy” as a reason for withholding some records, claiming they were “information that is intimate and embarrassing and not of legitimate concern to the public.” Taylor warned that releasing the emails could have a “chilling effect on the frank and open discussion necessary for the decision-making process.”
SpaceX’s lawyer echoed these concerns in a June 26 letter to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, arguing that public disclosure would harm the company’s competitive advantage. The matter was then referred to the Attorney General’s office, which ultimately sided mostly with Abbott and Musk. In an August 11 opinion, Assistant Attorney General Erin Groff agreed that many of the documents could be withheld, but ordered the release of some records that were “either not highly intimate or embarrassing” or that were of “legitimate public interest.”
When the documents were finally released in November, the result was, as open government experts described it, emblematic of a broader transparency problem in Texas. The vast majority of the pages were entirely redacted. The few that were readable consisted mostly of old incorporation records for SpaceX, meeting agendas for the governor’s committee on aerospace and aviation, emails about a state grant to SpaceX, and an application from a Musk employee to join a state commission. There were also mundane items such as a happy hour invitation and a reminder about an upcoming SpaceX launch. According to The Texas Newsroom, the emails revealed little about Musk’s influence over Texas government or the nature of his relationship with Abbott.
Legal experts were left baffled by the governor’s decision to release thousands of pages only to black them out almost entirely. Tom Leatherbury, director of the First Amendment Clinic at Southern Methodist University’s Dedman School of Law, told The Texas Newsroom, “They wanted you to see what little you could get in the context of the entire document, even though that’s kind of meaningless.” Leatherbury, who has performed pro bono legal work for The Texas Newsroom, explained that the situation highlights the ongoing erosion of public records access in Texas. He pointed to a 2015 Texas Supreme Court decision that allowed companies to block the release of public records by claiming they contained “competitively sensitive” information. This ruling, he said, has made it significantly harder for journalists and citizens to access records documenting interactions between government and private business.
The problem has only grown worse in recent years. In 2019, lawmakers passed a new law intended to ensure the release of basic information about government deals with private companies, but open government advocates say it didn’t go far enough. Local governments have continued to object to releasing contract information, and each legislative session brings new carve-outs to what qualifies as public information. For example, in 2025, legislators added exceptions for information related to fraud detection and military or aerospace discussions during public meetings.
The Texas Attorney General’s office, which referees public records disputes, has limited power to investigate whether withheld records actually contain trade secrets or confidential information. As Leatherbury explained, “Corporations are willing to assert that information is confidential, commercial information, and more governmental bodies are willing not to second-guess the company’s assertion.” This dynamic has led to a situation where, as attorney Reid Pillifant put it, “a governmental body can redact more than 1,000 pages of documents that are directly related to a major business’s activities in Texas.” Pillifant, who has represented media coalitions in lawsuits for public information, described the extensive redactions as “certainly problematic.”
The Texas Newsroom has asked the Office of the Attorney General to reconsider its decision and order the release of more Musk-related emails, but legal recourse is limited. A recent Texas Supreme Court ruling has made it even more difficult to enforce public records laws against the governor and other executive officers. “Every Texas citizen should care about access to these kinds of records because they shed light on how our public officials are making big decisions that affect the land where people live and how their taxpayer dollars are being spent,” Pillifant told The Texas Newsroom.
Meanwhile, Musk and his companies have remained silent on the matter, declining to respond to questions about the records. With the bulk of his business empire now rooted in Texas and his companies’ lobbyists successfully pushing for favorable legislation, Musk’s activities in the state continue largely outside the public eye. The released emails, or rather the lack of meaningful content within them, offer little reassurance to those concerned about transparency and accountability in Texas government.
For now, the episode stands as a stark illustration of how legal maneuvers, legislative loopholes, and broad claims of confidentiality can combine to keep the public in the dark about the dealings between powerful business interests and elected officials. As Texans and open government advocates look for answers, the blacked-out pages serve as a frustrating reminder of just how elusive true transparency can be.