WISCONSIN — A political firestorm has reignited in the Midwest as a government watchdog group in Wisconsin filed a new lawsuit aiming to permanently ban billionaire Elon Musk from offering cash incentives to voters in future elections.
The complaint comes months after Musk drew national scrutiny for handing out $1 million checks to Wisconsin voters, a move his critics say dangerously undermined electoral integrity in the April 1 Supreme Court race.
Lawsuit Targets Musk’s Election Spending Tactics
Filed on Wednesday by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, the lawsuit accuses Musk of orchestrating a “public nuisance” through vote bribery and unauthorized lotteries, actions it claims threaten to turn elections into “open auctions.”
The watchdog group is joined in the suit by two Wisconsin voters, represented by the liberal-leaning Law Forward and the Democracy Defenders Fund. Together, they seek a court order barring Musk from ever again offering cash or material incentives to influence voters.
“There is now a real risk that Wisconsin elections will go to the highest bidder,” the complaint states. “This lawsuit is about protecting the democratic process from billionaires who want to buy outcomes.”
Musk’s Million-Dollar Move Before Supreme Court Race
In March, Musk made headlines after his America PAC gave $1 million each to three Wisconsin voters, with two of those checks handed out in person just days before the contentious Wisconsin Supreme Court election. The spending was part of a broader $20 million campaign to support conservative candidate Brad Schimel.
Additionally, Musk’s political network offered $100 incentives to individuals who signed petitions against so-called “activist judges” or referred others to do so — a move his opponents called a legally dubious lottery-style incentive.
Despite the investment, Schimel lost to liberal candidate Susan Crawford by a 10-point margin, cementing a 4-3 liberal majority on the court.
Previous Challenges Failed — But Stakes Are Rising Again
This isn’t the first legal challenge against Musk’s Wisconsin payouts. The state’s Democratic attorney general previously attempted to block Musk’s actions, but the case was dismissed by lower courts and later rejected by the state Supreme Court on procedural grounds.
Now, with another state Supreme Court race scheduled for April and major elections looming in 2026, plaintiffs are determined to block Musk from reusing these tactics.
Interestingly, if this case reaches Wisconsin’s highest court, Justice Crawford — who benefited from Musk’s opponent losing — may be asked to recuse herself, potentially leading to a 3-3 deadlock on the bench.
Musk’s Team Silent As Legal Pressure Mounts
As of Wednesday, no comment has been issued by representatives of America PAC, the Musk-backed group at the center of the controversy.
The lawsuit also names United States of America Inc., another Musk-funded organization responsible for distributing the $1 million checks.
Notably, Musk has used similar tactics in the past, offering money to voters across multiple swing states in 2024 as part of a campaign tied to First and Second Amendment petitions. A federal judge in Pennsylvania allowed that effort to proceed, ruling that prosecutors failed to prove it was illegal.
However, a pending federal case still accuses Musk’s PAC of failing to pay more than $20,000 owed to petition signers in that earlier drive.
What Comes Next?
This latest legal action escalates ongoing questions about how far billionaires and political groups can go to influence elections — particularly in battleground states like Wisconsin.
The outcome of this case could set a national precedent as courts weigh free speech rights against potential vote-buying and manipulation.
Do You Think Billionaires Should Be Able To Fund Voter Incentives?
The lawsuit against Elon Musk raises big questions about money, influence, and democracy. Do you think his actions crossed the line — or was it all protected speech?
Let us know in the comments on ChicagoSuburbanFamily.com and join the conversation.
