Video: Elon Musk donates $1 million to rally attendees
According to US media, a letter sent by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to Elon Musk’s political action committee may make it illegal for Musk to donate $1 million per day to registered voters in the form of a lottery. I warned you that it’s sexual.
Musk, the world’s richest man, is actively supporting Republican Donald Trump in the presidential race against Kamala Harris.
Over the weekend, the owners of Tesla and X/Twitter began giving out prizes to American voters who signed the petition.
It’s unclear when the Justice Department’s letter was sent to Musk’s organization, America PAC. Justice Department investigators declined to comment on the case.
US news outlets, including the BBC’s US partner CBS News, reported on Wednesday that the letter informed Musk’s team that the giveaway could violate federal election law.
The document was sent by the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section following outrage from Democrats over Cash’s fraud.
Under US law, it is illegal to pay people to register to vote. However, it remains unclear whether this sweepstakes violates any laws.
Mr. Musk’s contest will offer money to signers of a petition circulated by the PAC.
In announcing the event in Pennsylvania on Saturday, Musk said he would “encourage 1 million voters in swing states, perhaps 2 million or more, to sign petitions in support of the First and Second Amendments. I would like to do my best to get them to do the same.”
Contest rules state that winners must be registered to vote, but political party affiliation is not required.
“We’re going to randomly give away $1 million (£770,000) to people who sign the petition every day from now until the election,” he said.
America PAC’s website states that the goal is to get “1 million registered voters in battleground states to sign in support of the Constitution, specifically the right to free speech and bear arms.”
Voters in seven battleground states can participate: Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, and North Carolina. Election Day in the United States is November 5th.
On Tuesday, a group of former Republican prosecutors sent a letter to the Justice Department urging the agency to investigate the contest.
“We know of nothing like this in modern political history,” they wrote, pointing to possible violations of federal and state law.
“Law enforcement agencies are naturally reluctant to take any last-minute actions that could affect how people vote. However, serious issues arising under laws that directly regulate the voting process must be an exception. It must be done.”
Musk previously denied claims that the contest was illegal, saying, “It doesn’t matter what political party you belong to. You don’t even have to vote.”
On Sunday, the contest reviewed its rules and explained that money is compensation for work, according to CNN.
America PAC said the winner “will be selected to win $1 million as a spokesperson for America PAC.” Winner continued to film pro-Trump videos.
Tim Walz accuses Elon Musk of trying to buy the election
Several legal experts told the BBC they believed the contest could be illegal.
“I think his proposal violates this provision because it only applies to registered voters,” said George Washington University law professor Paul Schiff Berman.
He pointed to U.S. law on election law, which says anyone who “pays, offers to pay, or accepts payment to register or vote” can be fined $10,000 or imprisoned for five years. It stipulates that there is a possibility of punishment.
Adab Noti of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center said Musk’s plan “violates federal law and is subject to civil or criminal enforcement action by the Department of Justice.”
“It is illegal to hand out money on the condition that the recipient registers as a voter,” Noti told the BBC.
But Jeremy Paul, a law professor at Northeastern University, said Musk may have found a loophole in the law.
He said there was an argument that the offer could be illegal, but he believed it was “aimed at circumventing what should be the law” and would be difficult to litigate in court. said.
