close
close
Elon Musk's  million daily donation to voters can continue, a Pennsylvania judge rules

Elon Musk's $1 million daily donation to voters can continue, a Pennsylvania judge rules

3 minutes, 19 seconds Read


Philadelphia
CNN

A Pennsylvania judge ruled Monday that Elon Musk's $1 million daily donation to voters can continue, a victory for the tech billionaire and Donald Trump ally.

But the practical impact of the ruling is limited and largely symbolic, as the competition is scheduled to end on Tuesday, election day.

Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Angelo Foglietta rejected arguments from the city's district attorney, Larry Krasner, who argued that the sweepstakes was an illegal lottery that violated state law and should be stopped immediately .

The verdict came shortly after a daylong hearing in a packed courtroom in downtown Philadelphia. The hearing was heated at times, with Krasner's team calling Musk's political team “hysters” who were engaging in “fraud” and “crime” – and Musk's team accusing the prosecutor of pursuing a “horrific violation of constitutional rights.”

Krasner, a progressive Democrat, filed the lawsuit a week ago. Daily giveaways from Musk's pro-Trump super PAC continued as the matter spiraled through the courts – despite Krasner's lawsuit and a warning from the Justice Department that the cash prizes could also violate federal election laws.

Musk and his lawyers have called Krasner's lawsuit a “publicity stunt” and accused him of bringing the case because he disagreed with Musk's advocacy for Trump.

“A lot of truth came out in court today, and it was stunning – stay tuned,” Krasner spokesman Dustin Slaughter told CNN Monday after the verdict.

The judge's decision referred to Krasner's emergency request to end the competition immediately. There's still a dispute over whether Musk's giveaway is illegal under state gambling law.

During the hearing, Krasner testified that in future proceedings his office would eventually seek to seek money from Musk or his super PAC for the “victims” of what he said was an unlawful lottery that deceived Philadelphians.

In court Monday, Musk's lawyers acknowledged that the super PAC doesn't choose winners “at random.”

“There is no prize to be won,” said Musk lawyer Chris Gober, and the winners “are not chosen at random.” Therefore, it is not a lottery, argued Gober.

Instead, Gober said the so-called “award” is actually compensation for serving as spokespersons for the super PAC — and recipients of the $1 million “will be selected based on their suitability to serve as spokespersons for the America PAC.” They “earn” the million dollars as payment for their work.

An attorney representing Krasner, John Summers, called this “a complete admission of liability,” and Krasner later testified on the witness stand that it was “one of the more disingenuous things I've ever heard.”

They pointed out that when Musk announced the raffle, he said, “We will randomly award $1 million to people who sign the petition,” referring to his petition in support of the Constitution.

“This was all political marketing disguised as a lottery,” Krasner said.

Later in the hearing, Musk's political adviser Chris Young provided new details about how the giveaways work.

“Our goal is to provide compensation only to registered voters and U.S. citizens and to avoid any possibility that we are providing funds to foreign nationals or anyone with ill intentions,” Young said.

Young, the super PAC's treasurer, said the group received many registrations from people who were not registered to vote — and those people “were given a follow-up opportunity and encouraged to check their registration status,” Young testified.

The Justice Department has warned the pro-Trump group that its sweepstakes could violate federal election laws that make it a crime to offer money or prizes to induce people to register to vote.

“The statement suggests that the PAC viewed the sweepstakes as an incentive to encourage voters to register, which would be contrary to federal law,” said Derek Muller, a CNN contributor and election law scholar who teaches at the University of Notre Dame . “This statement could be used if the Justice Department later files charges in federal court.”

This story has been updated with additional details.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *