Elon Musk's daily $1 million giveaway to voters can continue, Pennsylvania judge rules - Boston News, Weather, Sports

Philadelphia (CNN) — A Pennsylvania judge ruled this on Monday Elon Musk’s daily $1 million giveaway for voters can go ahead, in a victory for the tech billionaire and ally of Donald Trump.

However, the practical impact of the ruling is limited and mainly symbolic, because the lottery ends on election day on Tuesday.

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

The ruling came shortly after an all-day hearing in a packed courtroom in downtown Philadelphia. The hearing was heated at times, with Krasner’s team calling Musk’s political team “shysters” running a “scam” and “grift” — and Musk’s team accusing the prosecutor of pursuing a “terrible 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 issue wound its way 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 the lawsuit against Krasner a “publicity stunt” and accused him of filing the case because he disagrees with Musk’s plea in support of Trump.

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

The judge’s ruling was similar to Krasner’s emergency motion to stop the lottery immediately. There is still an underlying case over whether Musk’s giveaway is illegal under state gambling law.

During the hearing, Krasner testified that as part of future proceedings, his office will eventually seek to seek money from Musk or his super PAC for the “victims” of what he called an illegal lottery that defrauded Philadelphians.

Winners not chosen ‘by chance’

In court Monday, Musk’s lawyers recognized that the super PAC does not pick winners “by chance.”

“There is no prize to be won,” said Musk attorney Chris Gober, and the winners “are not chosen by chance.” That’s why it’s not a lottery, Gober argued.

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

An attorney representing Krasner, John Summers, called this “a full admission of liability,” and Krasner later testified on the witness stand that this was “one of the most unfair things I have ever heard.”

They pointed out that when announcing the giveaway, Musk said, “We’re going to randomly award $1 million to people who signed the petition,” referring to his petition in support of the Constitution.

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

Separate federal supervision

Later in the hearing, Musk’s political adviser Chris Young provided new details on how the giveaway worked.

“Our intent has always been to provide compensation only to registered voters and U.S. citizens, and to avoid any chance that we would somehow provide money to foreigners or anyone with malicious intent,” 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 option and encouraged to check their registration status,” Young testified.

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

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