MADISON, Wis. — Controversy has erupted over Elon Musk’s unusual attempt to support a conservative candidate in the forthcoming Wisconsin Supreme Court election. On Friday, the billionaire faced legal challenges amid claims that he violated state election laws.
In an unexpected move, Musk announced late on Thursday his intention to host a rally on Sunday in Wisconsin, where he vowed to provide $1 million checks to two voters who had already participated in voting. This gesture was described as a token of appreciation for their participation.
However, Wisconsin law strictly prohibits offering anything valuable in exchange for voting. As a result, numerous complaints emerged, including a lawsuit filed by Wisconsin’s Democratic attorney seeking to prevent Musk from distributing the checks.
In response to the growing backlash, Musk retracted his initial post and presented a revised offer. “To clarify a previous post, entrance is limited to those who have signed the petition opposing activist judges. I will also hand over checks for a million dollars to 2 people to be spokesmen for the petition,” he clarified in a later post.
Officials from Musk’s political action committee, known as America First, declined to comment on the reasoning behind the sudden change.
Musk’s initial announcement sparked an avalanche of disapproval just days ahead of the upcoming election on Tuesday, which is critical in defining the ideological direction of Wisconsin’s highest court in this pivotal battleground state.
Attorney General Josh Kaul sought an emergency court injunction on Friday to halt Musk’s payments, condemning the initiative as a “blatant attempt to violate” Wisconsin’s anti-bribery law. The law prohibits giving or offering anything of value to influence a voter’s decision.
The controversy extends to America First’s pledge to pay $100 to registered voters in Wisconsin for signing a petition against “activist judges” or referring the petition to others. Earlier in the week, they made headlines by awarding $1 million to a Green Bay resident, Scott Ainsworth, to act as a spokesperson for their petition campaign.
This strategy has triggered objections from a bipartisan group of government watchdog organizations, former officials, and a liberal law firm in Madison. They have urged both the state attorney general and Milwaukee County district attorney to investigate the legality of the payments.
Legal analysts on Friday indicated that Musk’s initial proposition seemingly violated the state’s bribery statute. Richard Painter, a law professor and former White House ethics chief, remarked, “You cannot pay people to vote or not to vote,” adding that such practices are illegal.
Musk’s subsequent revised offer aligned more closely with legal norms, though some experts remain uncertain.
Bryna Godar, from the University of Wisconsin Law School, pointed out that while Musk’s changes may create ambiguity under Wisconsin law, the actions might still breach election laws. The initial promise had been public during the active voting period, leading to possible legal implications despite the retraction.
Ben Wikler, the Democratic Party Chair of Wisconsin, criticized Musk bluntly, asserting, “Elon Musk committed a crime the moment he offered million-dollar checks ‘in appreciation for’ voting,” and implied that merely retracting the post does not absolve the potential legal violations.
If challenged, Musk’s payments could ultimately be addressed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Previously, Musk attempted similar tactics during the last year’s presidential race, providing incentives in multiple battleground states to influence voter behavior. Legal battles ensued, yet some activities persisted through Election Day, as courts sometimes viewed the efforts differently.
In this tightly contested Wisconsin Supreme Court race, Musk, through his political action committees, has invested substantially in supporting conservative Judge Brad Schimel. The race, against Democratic-backed Judge Susan Crawford, will determine control of the state’s highest court and has attracted more than $81 million in spending—setting a U.S. record for judicial election expenses.
Musk also contributed $3 million to the Wisconsin Republican Party, which could support Schimel’s campaign. The spending and attention on the race bring broader implications, reflecting on national political dynamics, including President Trump’s initiatives and Musk’s business interests, like Tesla’s efforts to expand in Wisconsin.
Jay Heck from Common Cause Wisconsin calls Musk’s influential efforts “unprecedented,” with projections suggesting that the election could cost up to $100 million. He expressed concern over the vast sums expended to sway a modest voter base in a traditionally low-turnout election.