West’s Counterstrike: Free Speech and Artistic Expression
In a motion filed in August 2025, West’s attorneys pushed back aggressively. They argue the lawsuit has less to do with what happened on set and more to do with West’s inflammatory public persona.
Pointing to references in An’s complaint to West’s past antisemitic remarks and his controversial comments about sexual assault survivors, his legal team says these details are irrelevant to the alleged 2010 incident. Instead, they characterize them as evidence of a broader attempt to silence West because of his views.
“These alleged quotations bear no relevance to the claims in this case and are presented without meaningful context,”his lawyer wrote. “Their inclusion should be considered as facts to support arguments regarding [An’s] motive to bring this lawsuit — to silence [West] for his controversial speech on matters of public concern.”
The defense frames the incident as part of a provocative music video performance — not a crime. West’s team claims the video shoot involved physical interaction between performers, that An never objected, and that she could have walked off set but chose not to.
“At no point during the production did [An] object to her role, express a lack of consent to participate, nor attempt to leave the performance,” the filing states.
