A lawyer revealed in court that Elon Musk explicitly chooses the winners of his ambitious daily $1 million giveaway based on their personal stories, rather than choosing them at random, which sparked controversy. At a hearing in Pennsylvania on November 4, lawyer Chris Gober made this allegation while defending Musk’s scheme against accusations that it functions similarly to a lottery.
The giveaway, which was first announced in early October, pledged to provide $1 million every day until the presidential election to one registered voter in important swing states, including Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania. However, Gober’s evidence challenges the idea of random distribution of these funds, arguing that Musk’s political action committee, America PAC, specifically selected the beneficiaries based on their qualifications as representatives.
District Attorney Larry Krasner has questioned the program’s constitutionality, arguing that it is an unregistered lottery. For this purported infraction, he has hinted that he would file criminal charges against Musk and America PAC. Gober disputed these assertions, stating that the giveaway is a means of choosing people who share the committee’s beliefs and who are capable of acting as spokespersons rather than a lottery.
A Pennsylvania judge, Angelo Foglietta, decided that the giveaway may go ahead in spite of the legal challenges. Just after Musk’s legal team announced that they would reveal the final beneficiaries prior to Election Day, the judge made a ruling that provided no details. Gober said the committee knows who will receive funding and stated that the selection process is not random.
Krasner and other opponents of the giveaway contend that it is deceptive and intended to sway the outcome of the election by asking participants for their personal information and political commitments. Musk’s legal team, meanwhile, argues that the project is a valid form of political expression and connects it to more general ideas of free speech and constitutional rights.
The protracted legal dispute over Musk’s $1 million donation raises concerns about the relationship between electoral integrity and campaign incentives as the election draws near.
