VALENCIA, UNITED STATES — Six Flags has announced the permanent closure of its X2 roller coaster after reports of serious brain injuries, multiple lawsuits and growing questions over rider safety now.
Six Flags Magic Mountain has decided to permanently retire X2, one of its most recognizable attractions, following months of scrutiny over reported serious injuries and renewed questions about the safety of extreme amusement park rides.
The announcement on September 29, 2026, marks a significant change for the Southern California theme park. X2 had been temporarily out of operation since July, following two separate incidents in which women sustained severe brain injuries after riding the attraction.
The decision follows an August investigation by CNN that examined the roller coaster's injury history, including serious incidents and fatalities, as well as subsequent lawsuits alleging that the ride exposed passengers to dangerous forces.
In announcing the permanent closure, park president Brian Oerding said X2 had consistently passed numerous safety tests. Nevertheless, the company decided that retiring the attraction was the appropriate response to concerns affecting visitor confidence.
The announcement does not resolve the legal claims against the park or establish the cause of every injury reported in connection with X2.
Why Six Flags Decided to Retire X2
X2 occupied a distinctive position in the international amusement park industry. Its engineering combined a conventional roller coaster track with independently rotating passenger seats, producing an experience considerably different from that of traditional roller coasters.
The attraction was particularly well known among enthusiasts who traveled to Six Flags Magic Mountain to experience its unusual combination of speed, steep drops and full-seat rotations.
Its permanent retirement follows a sequence of developments that intensified scrutiny of the ride during the summer of 2026.
Two women suffered serious brain injuries after riding X2 in July, reportedly requiring emergency medical treatment at the same Southern California hospital. The incidents occurred within days of each other.
The ride stopped operating shortly after the second incident and remained unavailable while questions surrounding its safety attracted increasing public attention.
The subsequent CNN investigation examined historical allegations and identified more than a dozen reports involving serious injuries and hospitalizations, including at least two deaths associated with the attraction.
On September 29, Six Flags confirmed that the temporary shutdown would become permanent.
Although the company maintained that X2 had passed extensive safety evaluations, the decision demonstrated that compliance with inspection requirements was not the only consideration influencing the attraction's future.
A Distinctive Roller Coaster With a Two-Decade History
X2's history began in 2002, when the attraction originally opened as X.
The roller coaster introduced an unusual configuration in which passengers sat on either side of the track rather than directly above it. Its seats could rotate independently as the train traveled along the course.
Following a major renovation, the attraction reopened in 2008 under the X2 name.
Its design made it an important attraction for enthusiasts interested in unusual roller coaster engineering.
Unlike conventional roller coasters, where the orientation of the passenger largely follows the movement of the train, X2 introduced additional rotation through its seating mechanism.
Passengers could therefore experience simultaneous changes in direction and body orientation.
The ride reached speeds approaching 80 miles per hour and completed its course in approximately two minutes.
Its distinctive engineering also raises an important distinction when examining the controversy: the experience of unusual movement does not, by itself, establish that an attraction is unsafe.
Determining whether a particular ride caused an injury requires consideration of the circumstances, medical findings, engineering evidence and other relevant information.
Those questions are now central to the legal disputes surrounding X2.
The July Injuries and Earlier Fatality
The two July incidents brought renewed attention to allegations involving the attraction.
Pamela Guillen and Naomi Greer-Wilkinson sustained serious brain injuries following separate rides on X2. Their cases subsequently became the subject of extensive reporting and legal action.
Medical professionals treating the women associated their injuries with traumatic acceleration and deceleration experienced during their rides, according to CNN's investigation.
The reported injuries included severe intracranial bleeding requiring emergency intervention.
Their cases also prompted renewed examination of earlier incidents.
One involved Christopher Hawley, a 22-year-old who died in 2022 after riding X2. CNN reported that a coroner's findings attributed his death to blunt head trauma sustained during an amusement park ride accident.
The associated wrongful death litigation was subsequently settled.
A settlement, however, should not automatically be interpreted as a judicial determination of liability.
CNN's investigation also documented other historical injury allegations involving the attraction.
The cases illustrate why investigators must distinguish between a reported medical event, evidence connecting that event to an amusement ride, and a legal finding establishing responsibility.
More Than 100 Injury Claims and Multiple Lawsuits
The controversy expanded considerably in September.
Attorneys representing people who say they were injured on X2 announced that more than 100 individuals had retained legal representation concerning alleged brain injuries sustained during the previous two years.
Three lawsuits highlighted during September involved Guillen, Greer-Wilkinson and Michael Wilk.
The complaints named Six Flags and the ride manufacturer, S&S Worldwide, and raised questions about the attraction's design, operation and warnings provided to passengers.
The plaintiffs allege that the defendants failed to adequately protect riders from foreseeable risks.
Those allegations remain subject to the legal process.
The number of people represented by attorneys should not be confused with the number of injuries independently verified by medical authorities or established through court judgments.
Similarly, the number of people who contact a law firm does not establish the incidence of injuries among everyone who experienced the attraction.
A meaningful assessment of the overall risk would require reliable information about total passenger exposure, confirmed medical incidents and the circumstances surrounding individual cases.
Six Flags has previously defended its inspection procedures and maintained that the attraction complied with applicable safety requirements.
The company has also declined to discuss the substance of pending litigation.
Permanent closure does not automatically determine liability in any of the outstanding cases.
What Safety Inspections Can and Cannot Establish
One of the central questions arising from the X2 controversy concerns the relationship between regulatory compliance and passenger safety.
Amusement rides operate within technical and regulatory frameworks intended to identify hazards, establish operating requirements and reduce the likelihood of accidents.
Inspections may examine mechanical systems, structural components, restraint mechanisms, maintenance records and other operational factors.
However, the fact that equipment passes an inspection does not necessarily establish the cause of a medical injury experienced by an individual passenger.
Mechanical compliance and medical causation are related but distinct questions.
In California, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health has responsibilities involving the regulation and inspection of amusement rides.
Regulatory investigations can examine whether an attraction complies with applicable requirements, while medical experts and courts may separately evaluate allegations about particular injuries.
In the X2 cases, the reported medical findings have prompted questions about the forces experienced by passengers during the ride.
The plaintiffs' allegations and Six Flags' statements about the attraction's inspection history represent different aspects of the controversy.
A complete understanding will depend on the available medical evidence, engineering assessments, regulatory findings and outcomes of the relevant legal proceedings.
What the Closure Means for Visitors
The permanent retirement of X2 removes one of Six Flags Magic Mountain's most distinctive attractions.
Visitors planning future trips should no longer expect the roller coaster to reopen.
For the wider amusement park industry, the controversy raises questions about how operators assess unusual ride designs, investigate injury complaints and communicate potential risks to passengers.
It also highlights the importance of distinguishing routine operational inspections from investigations prompted by reports of serious injuries.
The available reporting does not establish that other attractions at Six Flags Magic Mountain present the same alleged risks.
Nor does the closure establish that every person who experienced X2 was exposed to an identical level of danger.
The legal proceedings may provide further information about the incidents, the evidence considered by specialists and the responsibilities of the parties involved.
For now, the confirmed development is that Six Flags has permanently retired X2 after nearly two decades under that name.
Its closure ends the attraction's operational history while leaving significant medical, regulatory and legal questions unresolved.