272

A Pennsylvania judge ruled Monday that Elon Musk’s daily $1 million giveaway to voters can continue, in a victory for the tech billionaire and Donald Trump ally.

Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Angelo Foglietta rejected arguments from the city’s district attorney, Larry Krasner, who argued that the sweepstakes was an illegal lottery violating state law and must be halted 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” who are running a “scam” and “grift” – and Musk’s team accusing the district attorney of pursuing a “dreadful violation of constitutional rights.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Usernamealreadyinuse@lemmy.world 56 points 1 month ago

Can someone please eli5 me why this legal? This is truly above my pay grade apparently

[-] Valmond@lemmy.world 73 points 1 month ago

Heard he doesn't give the money away as a lottery, but to pre-selected people, who plays "the random voter" guy.

But what a shit show regardless.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 95 points 1 month ago

Oh so it's not campaign violations, it's just regular fraud.

[-] Nougat@fedia.io 66 points 1 month ago

It's still the same violation as originally brought before the court. Offering anything of value to someone for being registered to vote, explicitly including lottery entries, is illegal. That is what happened.

Lying about it being a lottery is an additional crime.

[-] kryptonidas 18 points 1 month ago

Yes, but he is no mere mortal. He is the richest mortal, thus the law does not bind him.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 15 points 1 month ago

Then why is the judge letting it continue?

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 7 points 1 month ago

And they prove that they aren't just lying to the public by making them think it's a lottery they actually have a chance in, right? Right??

Yeah right... So as usual muskrat gets to have his cake and eat it too.

[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 28 points 1 month ago

It clearly is illegal, but the judge is allowing it anyway. Most likely because they are extremely corrupt.

[-] ryan213@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 month ago

Somebody check that judge's finances!

[-] FlowVoid@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It's not necessarily legal.

The judge hasn't ruled yet on whether Musk broke the law. He simply declined to issue a preliminary injunction.

A preliminary injunction tells someone to stop what they are doing while the court case plays out. In order to get a preliminary injunction, you have to convince a judge that there will be irreparable harm by letting someone continue.

In other words, a judge might rule against an injunction but nevertheless end up ruling against the defendant. Especially if the judge thinks the harm has already been done.

[-] logi@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I believe you dropped an important "not"

[-] Hegar@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago
[-] jonne@infosec.pub 3 points 1 month ago

It all started with the Powell memo, which set off a movement to legalise corruption in the US.

this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2024
272 points (97.2% liked)

News

23600 readers
3443 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS