Musk butts up against Wisconsin state law with (now deleted) $1 million check giveaway
Source: Politico
Elon Musk will visit Wisconsin on Sunday ahead of the states high-profile Supreme Court election.
Musk initially announced the plan in a post shortly after midnight on Friday, promising a $1 million giveaway to two attendees who had voted. That post was deleted after legal experts raised concerns it would violate state law. Musk clarified on Friday afternoon that the giveaways would be limited to people who signed his super PACs petition.
-snip-
Legal experts immediately raised concerns that offering the Sunday giveaway for only those who have already voted could violate Wisconsins election bribery law, which makes it a crime to offer anything of value to induce potential voters to vote or not vote in an election. Early voting is underway in Wisconsin and runs through Sunday.
Im actually surprised that Musk is being so explicit about tying eligibility for this million dollar payout to having voted in the election, said Brendan Fischer, a campaign finance lawyer and deputy executive director of the watchdog organization Documented, about Musks earlier post. His tweet makes it very clear that you can only enter this event, and you can only be eligible for the million dollar payout, if you voted, and its hard to read that as anything other than providing a thing of value to induce a person to vote, or to reward them for having voted.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/03/28/elon-musk-wisconsin-supreme-court-giveaway-00257082
Earlier thread in GD about MeidasTouch messages on this:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220185418

et tu
(2,061 posts)love wisconsin~
AmericaUnderSiege
(777 posts)Some of them have done a lot of good over the generations. But what's this guy doing? The hard opposite.
Something is basically wrong with this guy, possibly on a medical level. He should maybe ask about an MRI. There could be something going on.
KPN
(16,498 posts)if i posted a statement that I was going to shoot someone, and then deleted it later because someone told me, oh, you cant do that unless you want to get prosecuted for a civil threat, would a State then decide it was okay because I had deleted it and, so, not prosecute me? Of course not.
We shall see what the difference is if there is one between an average citizen and a billionaire on this one.
dobleremolque
(987 posts)Alice B.
(462 posts)cbabe
(4,804 posts)highplainsdem
(55,072 posts)SSJVegeta
(204 posts)Intention is all that matters in these cases and a twitter post is as best as you can probably come to proving intention.
twodogsbarking
(13,115 posts)paleotn
(20,192 posts)