PHILADELPHIA—A lawsuit brought against Elon Musk over his $1 million giveaways to randomly selected registered voters who sign a petition supporting the First and Second amendments of the Constitution has been placed on hold after lawyers for the billionaire removed the case to federal court.
Removing cases filed in state courts to federal court is not uncommon and is done at the prerogative of defendants under federal law. One of the requirements is that removal of a case must happen within 30 days of the filing of a complaint.
Federal judges who are assigned to the removed cases can decide whether to keep them in federal court or remand them back to state courts.
Foglietta said that he would be available later in the day if the case were remanded back to him.
Musk’s lawyers said in their removal notice that the case brought by Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner involves significant federal issues and should thus be adjudicated by a federal judge.
“While the Complaint purports to raise only state-law claims relating to public nuisance and consumer protection, D.A. Krasner’s claims, as evident on the face of the Complaint, turn principally on the allegation that Defendants are somehow unlawfully interfering with a federal election,” the lawyers said.
Krasner asked a state court to stop Musk and the America PAC from continuing the giveaways.
Musk’s lawyers said in the new filing:
“Plaintiff is seeking emergency relief which, in and of itself, would require judicial intervention into the progress of an ongoing federal election. This, however, a state court cannot do, as the issue of whether a federal political action committee like America PAC—which is focused on making independent expenditures to influence campaigns for federal office, not state or local offices—is exclusively governed by federal law and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
Krasner was present in court, but another attorney, John Summers, argued for the district attorney’s office. Summers said that the case was one about state law and should proceed in the claims court and that Musk’s attempt to remove the case was cowardly and irresponsible.
Musk, Summers alleged, was attempting to use procedural maneuvers to run out the clock and avoid accountability because the law and facts weren’t on his side. In a motion on Oct. 31, Summers asked the federal district court to remand Musk’s case, or send it back down to the lower court.
Judge Gerald J. Pappert ordered the defendants to respond to Summers’ motion by 10 a.m. on Nov. 1.
Summers also cast doubt on the idea that Musk’s giveaway was random, noting that at least four recipients have come from Pennsylvania.
If the giveaway were random, Summers said, it was definitely a lottery. The PAC, he alleged, was luring people in to give it their personal information. The type of personal information it sought, he said, was often bought and sold among tech companies.
A lawyer for Musk argued that his client wasn’t a proper defendant in the case and that the prosecution should focus on America PAC instead of one of its donors. Summers responded in part by highlighting Musk’s role in announcing and promoting the contest.
“The 800-pound gorilla here is actually Elon Musk,” Summers told Foglietta.
Summers also decried as outrageous a post on X in which Musk suggested Foglietta was a leftist judge.
Musk did not appear at the hearing. Foglietta said that if the case ends up back in his court, Musk will be required to attend in the future.
