Musk's $1 million-a-day voter sweepstakes cleared by Pennsylvania court

Participants cite US Constitution justifying draw but officials argue contest violates Pennsylvania’s election laws

A Pennsylvania judge has ruled that Elon Musk's controversial $1 million-a-day voter sweepstakes can continue until Election Day. The ruling, made on Monday, allows Musk's political action committee (PAC) to proceed with its program, which has drawn criticism for allegedly attempting to sway the upcoming presidential election.

The sweepstakes, launched by Musk’s America PAC, has been awarding $1 million every day to individuals in key swing states.

Participants sign a petition supporting the US Constitution to be eligible for the daily draw. However, local officials, including Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, had argued that the contest was a thinly veiled attempt to influence the election and violate Pennsylvania’s election laws.

Judge Angelo Foglietta, who ruled in favor of allowing the sweepstakes to continue, did not provide a detailed explanation for his decision.

He noted that the winners of the sweepstakes were not selected by chance but were pre-vetted individuals chosen by the PAC.

This aspect of the giveaway sparked further controversy, as Krasner and others argued that the process was more of a political marketing stunt than a legitimate lottery.

Musk’s lawyers defended the program, calling it "core political speech," asserting that the petition signers were endorsing their constitutional rights, including free speech and the right to bear arms.

Chris Gober, Musk’s attorney, emphasized that the final two recipients would be chosen from Arizona and Michigan, with the program concluding before Election Day.

The PAC’s argument relied on the fact that recipients were selected based on personal values rather than a random drawing, which sharply contradicted Musk’s public statements.

In October, Musk had promised that the sweepstakes would randomly select winners each day, leading to accusations of false advertising and deceptive practices.

Krasner, a Democrat, labeled the sweepstakes a "scam" designed to manipulate voters and influence the election outcome.

He also raised concerns about the data collected from over a million people who had entered the sweepstakes, warning of its potential misuse for political purposes well beyond the election.

Despite the judge's ruling, legal battles may not be over. Krasner has said he might pursue civil damages for Pennsylvania residents involved in the contest and hinted at possible criminal charges.

Musk, who has committed significant financial resources to supporting Republican candidates, including Donald Trump, did not attend the court hearing but has been a prominent figure in the final stages of the 2024 campaign.

His PAC has spent millions to promote Trump’s bid for the presidency.

The legal fight surrounding the sweepstakes underscores the growing intersection of money, technology, and politics in the modern electoral process.

Musk’s sweepstakes, which have taken place in battleground states like Arizona, Georgia, and Michigan, are just one example of how big donors are increasingly shaping the outcome of US elections through unconventional means.

With Election Day just hours away, both Musk’s sweepstakes and the fierce battle between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris for the White House remain focal points of attention.

Previously, Musk was initially ordered to appear in a Philadelphia court on Thursday to address a lawsuit challenging his political action committee, America PAC’s, $1 million daily giveaway to voters.

However, Musk avoided the hearing by requesting that the case be moved from state to federal court.

Meanwhile, Musk made waves in the media when he appeared on Joe Rogan’s podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience.

His appearance sparked mixed reactions from fans, with some applauding his insights while others expressed concern over his political leanings.

The result of this closely watched election is likely to be influenced not only by traditional campaign strategies but also by these high-profile, unconventional political maneuvers.