A lawsuit filed against billionaire Elon Musk as a result of his $1-million-a-day voter prizes is pending a decision in federal court as of Thursday, after the world's richest man failed to attend a hearing he was ordered to appear at.
Musk, who was not present at Thursday's hearing, was not immediately punished for his non-attendance by presiding Judge Angelo Foglietta, though Foglietta agreed that Musk should have been present, according to AP News.
Musk's attorney, Matthew Haverstick, defended his client's non-attendance, stating that Musk could not just "materialize" in the courtroom after being informed of the hearing only the previous night. District Attorney Larry Krasner's team, who filed the lawsuit against Musk and America PAC, responded, disagreeing with the idea that Musk could not make it to Philadelphia.
"Counsel, he's not going to get in a rocket ship and land on the building," Foglietta said in response to Krasner's team.
Musk-founded America PAC has been offering $1 million sweepstakes prizes to registered voters in certain battleground states who have also signed a petition started by America PAC in support of First and Second Amendment rights. It is illegal to pay people to register to vote, according to federal law. Musk, who has held solo rallies in support of Donald Trump's presidential campaign, started this initiative in order to boost the former President's campaign.
Foglietta placed the state case on hold after Musk's lawyers brought up claims of election interference ahead of the 2024 presidential election. The case has been assigned to Republican Judge Gerald J. Pappert who was formerly appointed Pennsylvania attorney general by Barack Obama.
Attorneys on Krasner's team noted that four of the first dozen winners of Musk's prizes were Pennsylvania residents, further noting that the presidential race in the state has become increasingly close, and could determine the overall results of the election.
"Is it just a coincidence that this is the state that has the largest electoral votes? I don't think so," said lawyer John Summers.
"They're doing things in the dark," Summers told the judge. "We don't know the rules being followed. We don't know how they're supposedly picking people at random ... It's an outrage."
Originally published by Latin Times.
