Elon Musk sparks controversy with $1M cheques in Wisconsin
Elon Musk handed two individuals cheques valued at $1 million to voters in Wisconsin. This was his way of promoting a petition to stop "activist" judges. At the same time, he and Donald Trump endorsed Brad Schimel in the Wisconsin Supreme Court elections.
Billionaire Elon Musk handed out $1 million cheques to voters in Wisconsin. The State Supreme Court refused to intervene in the matter. According to BBC reports, Musk announced this initiative ahead of the upcoming Supreme Court elections in Wisconsin, which will take place on Tuesday.
Read more: Trump warns Zelensky. Foretells "big problems."
Josh Kaul, the Attorney General of Wisconsin, attempted to block Musk's action, arguing that it violates laws prohibiting offering gifts in exchange for votes. Musk and his lawyers argued that the cheques are intended to create a movement against "activist" judges, not to endorse a specific candidate.
Two individuals who signed the petition to stop "activist" judges received two cheques amounting to a million dollars. They are Ekaterina Diestler and Nicholas Jacobs. Elon Musk donated $19 million to Judge Schimel's campaign, and the race turned out to be the most expensive judicial nomination race in the country's history, the BBC reports.
Already last year, the billionaire encouraged residents of seven states in a similar way to sign petitions supporting the First and Second Amendment rights, which talk about the prohibition of restricting freedom of religion, the press, speech, petition, and assembly, as well as the right to bear arms.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court elections are seen as crucial, potentially shifting the balance of power favouring Republicans.
Musk and Donald Trump support the conservative candidate, Judge Brad Schimel, the BBC reminds us. He will compete against Susan Crawford, whom liberal judges endorse. Schimel has distanced himself from Musk's decision to hand out cheques to voters. The elections are also considered a referendum on Trump's second term, and their outcome could affect future court decisions on issues such as abortion rights or redistricting.
