In the high-stakes world of billionaires, where personal lives often intersect with legal and financial maneuvering, Elon Musk has once again found himself at the center of a public storm. The Tesla and SpaceX CEO, known for his polarizing persona and ambitious ventures, has reportedly revoked a substantial financial payout to one of his former partners—referred to in media circles as a “baby mama”—after she allegedly violated a confidentiality agreement. The decision, which has sparked heated debate, underscores the lengths to which Musk goes to protect his privacy and the complex dynamics of his personal relationships. This latest controversy, unfolding in 2025, adds another chapter to Musk’s tumultuous personal life, raising questions about power, control, and the cost of speaking out.

A Pattern of Privacy

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man with a net worth exceeding $400 billion, has long been a figure who courts both admiration and controversy. His personal life, marked by multiple high-profile relationships and at least 14 known children, has often been shrouded in secrecy, with nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) playing a central role. These legal contracts, designed to protect sensitive information, have become a hallmark of Musk’s interactions with romantic partners and employees alike. In this case, the former partner in question, a conservative influencer named Ashley St. Clair, allegedly breached an NDA by publicly discussing their relationship and their shared child, prompting Musk to take swift action.

St. Clair, 26, announced in February 2025 that she had given birth to Musk’s 13th child, a son named Romulus, born in September 2024. The revelation came in a post on X, where she stated her intent to protect her child’s privacy but felt compelled to speak out due to impending tabloid coverage. According to sources, Musk had offered St. Clair a significant financial package—rumored to include a one-time payment of $15 million and monthly child support of $100,000 until the child reached 21—in exchange for her silence about their relationship and the child’s paternity. The agreement, however, came with strict conditions, including a clause that required St. Clair to refrain from making public statements about Musk or their son without his approval.

The Alleged Breach

The trouble began when St. Clair filed two petitions in the New York Supreme Court in February 2025, seeking sole custody of Romulus and demanding that Musk take a paternity test to legally establish his fatherhood. In her filings, she claimed Musk had only met their son three times—once for two hours in New York City, once for an hour the following day, and once for 30 minutes in Austin, Texas—and had shown little interest in parenting. She also included text messages and a photo of Musk holding Romulus as evidence, further escalating the public nature of their dispute. These actions, according to Musk’s legal team, violated the terms of the NDA, which explicitly prohibited disclosing details about their relationship or the child.

Musk’s response was swift and uncompromising. In March 2025, he reportedly reduced the financial support he had been providing for Romulus, which St. Clair’s legal team described as “substantial retaliation.” St. Clair claimed that Musk had initially provided $2.5 million and $500,000 annually, but after her public statements, he slashed the payments by 60 percent, leaving her in financial distress. In a dramatic move, St. Clair sold a $100,000 Tesla Model S—allegedly a gift from Musk—to cover expenses, announcing on her podcast, Bad Advice with Ashley St. Clair, that she was facing eviction and financial ruin. “I’m not doing this because I think my thoughts are a gift to humanity,” she quipped. “I’m doing this because I’m broke and getting evicted.”

A Bitter Public Feud

The dispute has spilled into the public arena, fueled by social media and the polarized world of online influencers. St. Clair’s decision to go public with her allegations drew sharp criticism from Musk’s supporters, including fellow MAGA influencer Isabella Moody, who accused St. Clair of orchestrating a “pregnancy plot” to “baby trap” Musk. Moody shared alleged text messages from May 2023, when St. Clair and Musk began their relationship, in which St. Clair reportedly wrote, “Elon followed me. I need his rocket babies,” and asked for help crafting a caption to “seduce” Musk. Musk amplified these claims, responding with a “Woah!” on X, further intensifying the narrative that St. Clair had ulterior motives.

St. Clair, in turn, accused Musk of being a “petulant man-child” who used his wealth to control and silence her. She argued that the NDA was unfairly restrictive, lacking provisions for her son’s medical or security needs and allowing Musk to publicly disparage her while barring her from responding. Her legal team emphasized that Musk’s financial retaliation was an attempt to “gag” her for seeking custody and paternity acknowledgment, noting that he had refused to take a paternity test until ordered by the court in April 2025. The test confirmed Musk as the father with a 99.9999 percent probability, but the damage was done: the once-private agreement had become a public spectacle.

Musk’s History with NDAs

This is not the first time Musk has used NDAs to manage his personal and professional relationships. In 2018, SpaceX paid a flight attendant $250,000 to settle a sexual misconduct claim against Musk, with the agreement including strict nondisclosure and non-disparagement clauses. Similarly, Musk’s former wife, Justine Wilson, signed a postnuptial agreement that limited her claims to their shared property, a decision she later regretted. More recently, Musk’s Neuralink executive Shivon Zilis, the mother of four of his children, and musician Grimes, who shares three children with Musk, have both navigated complex custody disputes with him, often under the shadow of NDAs.

Musk’s reliance on NDAs reflects his belief that public disclosures about his personal life could pose security risks, particularly given his high-profile status. In text messages reported by St. Clair, Musk expressed concern that public knowledge of Romulus could endanger the child, citing his own perceived risk of assassination. He also reportedly urged St. Clair to have their child via C-section, claiming it would promote a “larger brain,” and expressed a desire to have nine more children with her to build what he called a “legion of kids.” These statements, while aligned with Musk’s public advocacy for addressing declining birthrates, have been criticized as eccentric and controlling.

The Broader Context

Musk’s actions come amid his broader push to create a family compound in Austin, Texas, where he has purchased multiple properties to house his children and their mothers. The compound, which currently includes Neuralink executive Shivon Zilis and her four children with Musk, is part of his vision to address what he calls an “underpopulation crisis.” Musk has been vocal about his belief that declining birthrates threaten global civilization, often citing his growing family as part of his contribution to the cause. However, critics argue that his use of financial leverage and NDAs to control his partners undermines his public stance as a champion of free speech.

St. Clair’s case has also drawn attention to the power dynamics between Musk and the women in his life. Her legal team has accused him of using his wealth to “buy silence,” a tactic they claim is evident in his dealings with other partners. The controversy has sparked debate about the ethics of NDAs in personal relationships, particularly when they involve children and custody disputes. While Musk’s supporters argue that he is entitled to protect his privacy, St. Clair’s advocates contend that her right to speak out about her child’s welfare outweighs any contractual obligations.

A Community Divided

The public reaction to the feud has been predictably polarized. On X, where Musk wields significant influence as the platform’s owner, supporters have rallied behind him, accusing St. Clair of exploiting their relationship for fame and financial gain. Influencers like Laura Loomer have called her a “gold digger,” urging Musk to fight for custody and withhold further support. Meanwhile, others have praised St. Clair for challenging Musk’s authority, arguing that her transparency exposes the billionaire’s attempts to control the narrative around his personal life.

The legal battle is ongoing, with Musk reportedly seeking to seal court documents to prevent further disclosures. St. Clair’s attorneys, however, are pushing back, arguing that Musk’s commitment to transparency—evident in his role as co-chair of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—should extend to his personal affairs. The outcome of the case could set a precedent for how NDAs are enforced in high-profile custody disputes, particularly when one party holds disproportionate financial and legal power.

A Tale of Wealth and Control

At its core, the dispute between Elon Musk and Ashley St. Clair is a story of wealth, power, and the lengths to which one of the world’s most influential figures will go to maintain control. For Musk, NDAs are a tool to safeguard his privacy and protect his children from public scrutiny. For St. Clair, they represent an attempt to silence her and limit her ability to advocate for her son. As the legal battle unfolds, it highlights the challenges of navigating relationships with a billionaire whose personal life is as complex and controversial as his public persona.

The revocation of St. Clair’s payout has left her in a precarious financial position, but it has also amplified her voice. Her podcast, launched amid the controversy, has become a platform for her to share her side of the story, drawing both support and criticism. For Musk, the incident is a reminder that even the world’s richest man cannot fully control the narrative when personal relationships and public platforms collide. As the saga continues, it serves as a stark illustration of the high cost of breaking silence in the shadow of a billionaire’s empire.