In a recent development, a Wisconsin appellate court has dismissed a motion from the state Democratic Attorney General aimed at preventing billionaire Elon Musk from distributing $1 million checks to two voters during a Sunday rally. This event is strategically timed, being only two days ahead of a competitive Supreme Court election that has already set records for judicial election spending.
The court’s decision on Saturday is the latest in a series of episodes involving Musk, who has become significantly involved in the ongoing judicial race. This election is widely viewed as a gauge for the political atmosphere in the early months of Donald Trump’s administration. Currently, Trump and Musk are supporters of Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, while the opposition, aligning with the Democratic party, supports Dane County Judge Susan Crawford.
Attorney General Josh Kaul initiated legal action on Friday, contesting Musk’s financial promise on the grounds of legal violation. Despite this, a county court judge declined to grant an emergency injunction to prevent the financial disbursements, prompting Kaul to escalate the matter to the state Court of Appeals.
Musk is scheduled to host a rally on Sunday, during which he plans to award $1 million each to two Wisconsin voters who have signed an online petition against so-called “activist” judges. Furthermore, Musk is offering $100 as a signing incentive, and has already bestowed a $1 million sum to a Green Bay resident who participated.
In the run-up to this crucial election, Musk and affiliated groups have already funneled over $20 million into campaign strategies, whereas Democratic donors, including George Soros, are financially supporting Crawford. This election will play a pivotal role in determining the court’s ideological slant, which, for the moment, sees liberals with a 4-3 majority—an advantage that could shift with an upcoming retirement impacting the balance.
Attorney General Kaul contends that Musk’s pledges contravene a state law prohibiting the distribution of items of value in return for voting participation, an offense deemed a felony. The tactics employed by Musk’s political action committee bear similarities to those used before the last presidential election, where $1 million per day was offered to voters in Wisconsin and several other pivotal states, contingent on signing a petition supporting constitutional amendments. A judge in Pennsylvania had previously ruled that this strategy did not constitute an illegal lottery, thereby permitting its continuation through Election Day.
The significance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court race extends into various domains, with its outcomes likely influencing pivotal rulings on abortion rights, congressional redistricting, union power, and voting regulations, all of which have repercussions for future elections slated for 2026 and 2028.
Initially, Musk announced via his social media platform X, his intention to personally deliver a total of $2 million to two voters who have already participated in this election. In response, Attorney General Kaul has sought a court order to prevent Musk from facilitating this financial giveaway and to dissuade any further monetary offerings aimed at Wisconsin voters.
Although Musk has since removed his original social media post, there has been no official communication indicating a halt to the planned payments, as pointed out in Kaul’s legal submissions.