Will Elon Musk Give $2 Million To Wisconsin Voters Tonight? AG Wants State Supreme Court To Block It

Forbes - Mar 30th, 2025

Wisconsin's Attorney General Josh Kaul is seeking intervention from the state's Supreme Court to prevent Elon Musk from awarding $1 million each to two Wisconsin voters at a rally. The giveaway, organized by Musk and America PAC, is in support of Supreme Court candidate Brad Schimel, a Republican. Kaul argues that the cash prizes violate state election laws against giving voters 'anything of value' to influence their voting behavior. Despite Musk's initial claim that the giveaways were a reward for voting, which he later retracted, the legal challenge persists. Lower courts have refused to halt the event, leading Kaul to appeal to the state's highest court before the rally's scheduled start.

The controversy underscores the high stakes of the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, which is seen as a critical indicator of voter sentiment early in President Trump's tenure. The election could shift the court's ideological balance, impacting key issues like abortion and redistricting. Musk's involvement, through substantial financial contributions and America PAC's activities, highlights his growing influence in American politics. The outcome may also affect Musk's business interests, notably Tesla's legal battles in Wisconsin. As both candidates receive significant backing from prominent donors, this race exemplifies the increasing role of billionaires in political campaigns.

Elon Musk Wisconsin Supreme Court America Pac Brad Schimel Political Campaigns Josh Kaul Election Law

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.0

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive overview of Elon Musk's controversial involvement in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, highlighting the legal and political implications of his actions. It effectively balances different perspectives and maintains clarity, making it accessible to a broad audience. However, it could benefit from additional source diversity and transparency in its legal interpretations. The story is timely and addresses significant public interest issues, with the potential to influence discussions on election integrity and political influence. Overall, it is a well-structured piece that responsibly handles a complex and controversial topic.

Accuracy

The story accurately reports on the key facts surrounding Elon Musk's involvement in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, including his plans to give away $2 million to voters and the legal challenges posed by Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul. The article correctly outlines the sequence of events, such as Musk's initial and revised statements on the purpose of the giveaways. However, the article could improve by providing more detailed verification of the legal interpretations and the exact financial figures involved. Overall, the story aligns well with the facts but would benefit from additional source citations and detailed evidence to support the claims made.

Balance

The article presents multiple perspectives, including those of Elon Musk, the Wisconsin Attorney General, and legal experts. It includes Musk's defense of his actions as political speech and the Attorney General's view of potential legal violations. However, the story could improve by providing more insights from neutral legal analysts or election law experts to offer a more balanced view of the legal implications. Additionally, while it mentions the involvement of other billionaires, it does not delve deeply into their motivations or the broader context of their contributions.

Clarity

The article is generally clear and well-structured, with a logical flow of information. It effectively uses subheadings to break down complex information into digestible sections. The language is neutral and accessible, making the story easy to follow. However, the clarity could be enhanced by simplifying some of the legal jargon and providing clearer explanations of the legal context for readers unfamiliar with election law.

Source quality

The story relies on credible sources such as the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel and The New York Times for quotes and context. However, it lacks direct quotes from primary sources like court documents or statements from the involved parties, which would enhance credibility. The article could also benefit from a wider range of sources, including direct interviews with legal experts or representatives from both political campaigns.

Transparency

The article provides a fair amount of context about the Wisconsin Supreme Court race and Musk's involvement. However, it does not clearly disclose the methodology behind the claims or provide detailed explanations of the legal arguments. The piece could improve transparency by clarifying the basis for the legal interpretations and the potential conflict of interest concerns mentioned.