PHILADELPHIA—A judge has denied Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner’s request to block the $1 million giveaway program that billionaire Elon Musk and America PAC have been operating in the lead-up to the Nov. 5 election.
Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Judge Angelo Foglietta issued the denial after a Nov. 4 hearing that was prompted by Krasner’s civil lawsuit against Musk and America PAC.
Krasner had accused Musk and America PAC of running an illegal lottery, which he said created a public nuisance, and violating a state consumer protection law. The program is set to conclude on Election Day, Nov. 5.
Foglietta said at the beginning of the hearing that because another day remained for the program, he didn’t think the case was moot. Musk was not in the courtroom, located within Philadelphia City Hall.
America PAC attorney Chris Gober argued that despite Musk’s description of the giveaway as random, the program was not random. Gober said the program involved a contractual relationship in which participants served as spokespeople for the political action committee after being selected by a predetermined pool of people.
Gober said that 6,661 of 18,000 payments—of differing amounts—owed to the residents of Philadelphia County had already been mailed. Around 3,000 were in process and slated to be mailed on Nov. 4 while the remaining—around 7,000—were slated to be mailed on Nov. 5.
John Summers, an attorney representing Krasner’s office, said the PAC is relatively opaque about details surrounding the giveaways and terms for the PAC’s relationship with participants.
Summers pointed to Musk’s giveaway statement and argued that the fact that the giveaway wasn’t actually random was not a valid defense. He also noted the testimony from America PAC Director Chris Young stating that he was surprised to hear Musk call the giveaway random.
During his closing argument, Summers alleged the defendants’ lack of transparency cheated thousands of Philadelphians.
Andy Taylor, another attorney for the defense, basing his closing argument on the First Amendment, said Krasner was asking for a violation of core political speech by stopping people from signing the PAC’s petition.
Taylor said that the giveaway was by design rather than by chance. The winner selection process, he said, should be likened to a job application rather than a lottery.
Summers responded to Taylor in part by stating that the case had nothing to do with freedom of speech and should instead be viewed as fraud.
“No one’s First Amendment rights are being smothered,” Summers said.
