Politics
Column: Elon Musk's voter lottery looks illegal. Too bad he'll probably get away with it
Elon Musk’s voter registration lottery scheme is too cute by half and probably illegal. It also illustrates why violations of election law often go unpunished.
Musk announced last weekend that he would award $1 million a day until the election to a randomly selected registered Pennsylvania voter who signs a petition professing support for the 1st and 2nd Amendments. He has already bestowed the first few checks and expanded the sweepstakes to signers from the other key electoral battlegrounds, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and North Carolina.
Now why would the world’s richest man concoct such a strangely designed game of chance and dangle instant-millionaire status before registered voters? Is he that gratified by attestations of support for the first fifth of the Bill of Rights — though only in swing states and only until the election?
Musk’s game is plainly to harvest new voters for Donald Trump. Both Trump’s campaign and Kamala Harris’ are spending millions of dollars daily in their desperate efforts to persuade and motivate the voters who might tip the apparently deadlocked race. Musk thinks he has hit on a novel and clever way to use his own vast riches to entice voters more directly.
Maybe he has, but his creative method also appears to be illegal. The rub is that he may well get away with it.
Federal law makes it a felony to pay anyone to register to vote, codifying the bedrock principle that people should exercise the franchise based on their free will rather than the purchasing power of a candidate or interest group. The law arose partly because of organized efforts to pay eligible voters to register.
Musk’s ham-handed scheme is designed to induce new registrations of voters who are likely to vote for Trump while appearing to comply with the law. Indeed, it seems likely to appeal to the sort of coveted potential swing-state voter who may not have registered or consistently cast a ballot in past elections. All they have to do to get a shot at a life-changing payout is register — which state and federal law rightly make very easy — and sign Musk’s phony-baloney petition.
The enticement doesn’t ensure that the signers will vote — or that they will vote for Trump — and they may already be registered. But that shouldn’t obscure what the lottery clearly does achieve.
First, it provides something of value to everyone who plays, even if all but one contestant walks away empty-handed. That’s why lottery tickets aren’t free: The chance to make a million has some small value and is often treated as more valuable than it really is.
Second, it induces new voter registrations — imperfectly, yes, but perhaps as or more efficiently than, say, a supermarket registration drive. So what if some of the signers were already registered or or end up failing to vote? Musk and Trump don’t care about those people or whether they go home with checks. What matters is that in the process, unregistered people will have registered. And while it’s conceivable that the contest will produce a few previously unregistered Harris voters, the people who register and sign the petition are more likely to vote for the former president.
The Department of Justice has reportedly sent a letter to Musk’s super PAC, which administers the scheme, advising that it may be illegal. Most law-abiding campaigns would be alarmed by such a shot across the bow. Trump and Musk, however, are more likely to laugh it off.
They may have time and circumstances on their side. In practice, it’s often difficult to stop election law violations in the limited time remaining before the voting concludes, after which it’s effectively too late.
The barriers to law enforcement here are typical of election matters. To begin with, while every voter in the state (or every Harris voter) is arguably harmed by the scheme to manipulate the electorate, it would be difficult to find someone to bring a claim against Musk. The Supreme Court has found that a “generalized grievance” that applies equally to every voter can’t confer the necessary legal standing.
The Department of Justice could sue Musk’s PAC and seek an injunction directing it to cease any unlawful behavior. And it might. But the department’s letter was sent days ago without public comment, and its reported warning that the lottery may be illegal isn’t likely to petrify scofflaws such as Musk and Trump. And it’s well-known that the department is habitually hesitant to do anything that could be perceived as interfering with an election.
Even if the department did secure an injunction, there would be no way to undo the new registrations of likely Trump voters that Musk already has stitched up. The same would be true if the department leveled federal criminal charges against the PAC, the prospects of which are remote for that and other reasons.
That turns out to be a common feature of election law. Remember the notorious butterfly ballot that inadvertently diverted more than 2,000 Floridians’ votes from Al Gore to Pat Buchanan in 2000, more than enough to change the result in George W. Bush’s favor? By the time it became clear that so many voters had been misled, there was nothing to be done.
With the coming election looking even tighter in the polls than the last two, the parties and the country have reason to obsess over tens or hundreds of votes in the swing states that will pick the next president. But elections are inevitably imperfect. Absent extraordinary vigilance and in many cases notwithstanding it, the election could turn on freakish events or even the fruits of a probably criminal scheme.
Harry Litman is the host of the “Talking Feds” podcast and the “Talking San Diego” speaker series. @harrylitman
Elon Musk and President Trump began a relationship nearly a decade ago that developed into a close partnership over the last year. That alliance unraveled publicly in just a few days.
Here’s a look at what the two men have said about each other over the years — both the praises and the jabs.
Frenemies (2016-23)
The relationship between Mr. Musk and the president started off rocky. Before the 2016 presidential election, Mr. Musk said in an interview with CNBC that Mr. Trump was “not the right guy” to lead the country. Over the next few years, Mr. Trump would both praise and insult the tech billionaire.
What Musk said
Nov. 4, 2016
July 11, 2022
What Trump said
Jan. 22, 2020
July 9, 2022
Oct. 28, 2022
Mr. Musk in 2022 reinstated Mr. Trump’s account on Twitter, now X, after purchasing the social media platform, but would later support Ron DeSantis in the early days of the Florida governor’s presidential campaign.
A close allyship (2024-May 2025)
Mr. Musk gave a strong endorsement to Mr. Trump after the first assassination attempt against him at a rally in Butler, Pa., in July 2024. That year, Mr. Musk spent over a quarter of a billion dollars helping to elect Mr. Trump, and was later rewarded with a top adviser position and broad powers to slash the federal bureaucracy.
Mr. Musk made a stunning Oval Office appearance in February, alongside Mr. Trump. During his time as a “special government employee,” Mr. Musk had a public spat with a top Trump economic adviser, Peter Navarro.
What Musk said
July 13, 2024
Oct. 5, 2024
Nov. 11, 2024
April 8, 2025
May 27, 2025
May 30, 2025
What Trump said
Oct. 5, 2024
Feb 11, 2025
March 11, 2025
May 30, 2025
Feud (June 2025)
Cloying flattery abruptly turned into a hostile feud after Mr. Musk criticized the president’s signature domestic policy bill. The two men traded insults — mostly over their respective social media platforms — in what has become a very public breakup.
What Musk said
June 3, 2025
June 5, 2025
June 5, 2025
What Trump said
June 5, 2025
June 5, 2025
June 5, 2025
Politics
House Speaker Johnson: Dems who want ICE agents unmasked 'mandated mask wearing for years' during COVID
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
House Speaker Mike Johnson told Fox News on Friday that Democrats pushing for ICE agents to unmask themselves are the same “people who mandated mask wearing for years in America” during the coronavirus pandemic.
Johnson was asked by Fox News for his reaction as “some Democrats, including [House Minority] Leader [Hakeem] Jeffries, have suggested that the ICE agents who are arresting some of these migrants should not be wearing masks.”
“From the people who mandated mask wearing for years in America. It’s absurd. They need to back off of ICE and respect our agents and stop protesting against them,” Johnson said. “They’re trying to uphold the rule of law, and they don’t want to be targeted by Democrat activists. So I’m in favor of whatever protocol.”
Jeffries said Tuesday that ICE agents who attempt to conceal “their identities from the American people, will be unsuccessful in doing that” and they will all be identified “no matter what it takes, no matter how long it takes.”
ICE OFFICIAL PUTS POLITICIANS ON BLAST, DEMANDING THEY ‘STOP PUTTING MY PEOPLE IN DANGER’
House Speaker Mike Johnson, left, reacted Friday to recent comments from House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries’ about ICE agents wearing masks. (Getty Images)
Johnson was then asked Friday “so you’re okay with these agents sort of not identifying themselves when they’re arresting migrants?”
“Why? So that they can target them?” he responded. “So they can put their names and faces online and dox them? That’s what these activists do. So we have to protect those who protect our communities.
“And it’s absurd for anybody, members of Congress or any other elected leader, to be calling out ICE for trying to do their job. They’ve made it difficult for them to do it for years, and I just think it’s patently absurd,” Johnson also said.
At his weekly press conference Friday, Fox News asked Jeffries if he was concerned that possibly demasking some ICE agents puts them or their families’ safety at risk.
“It seems to me that the officials at the Department of Homeland Security, including ICE, should be held to the same standards as every other part of law enforcement in terms of transparency,” the Democrat from New York said.
HOMELAND SECURITY SAYS BOSTON’S MAYOR COMPARING ICE AGENTS TO NEO-NAZIS IS ‘SICKENING’
Boston Mayor Michelle Wu has also recently spoken out against ICE agents wearing masks. (Irfan Khan/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images and Adam Glanzman/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
On Jeffries’ official X account, in September 2020, he wrote “It’s not that complicated. Wear. A. Mask.”
Then around a year later, in August 2021, Jeffries said “Get vaccinated. Wear a mask. Crush the virus.”
Two Democrat senators from Virginia, Mark Warner and Tim Kaine, also wrote a letter last month to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and other top officials about ICE’s recent immigration enforcement operations taking an “alarming and dangerous turn.”
“Across the country and in Virginia, masked ICE officers and agents without clearly visible identification as law enforcement have been arresting individuals on the streets and in sensitive locations, such as courthouses. Such actions put everyone at risk – the targeted individuals, the ICE officers and agents, and bystanders who may misunderstand what is happening and may attempt to intervene,” they said.
WHITE HOUSE BACKS MAJOR LEGISLATION TO SPEED UP DEPORTATIONS
ICE officers are seen making an arrest in Lynn, Mass., last month. (ICE )
“We urge you to direct ICE officers and agents to promptly and clearly identify themselves as law enforcement officers conducting law enforcement actions when arresting subjects, and limit the use of face coverings during arrests and other enforcement actions to avoid intimidation and reduce safety risks to the public,” the Senators added.
In August 2021, Kaine pushed mask wearing as well, writing in a Facebook post that he was “Deeply concerned about the rapid rise of COVID-19 delta variant infections we are seeing across the Commonwealth” and that “We should do all we can to help stop the spread of the virus and keep ourselves and our loved ones safe, including following CDC guidance such as getting vaccinated, masking up indoors, and social distancing.”
“Folks, let’s continue to protect ourselves by getting vaccinated, masking up, and social distancing so we can safely return to all of the activities we love,” Warner added at the time.
Representatives for Jeffries, Kaine and Warner did not immediately respond Friday to requests for comment from Fox News Digital.
Fox News’ Chad Pergram, Tyler Olson and Alex Nitzberg contributed to this report.
With new legal muscle, the nonprofit Freedom of the Press Foundation is upping pressure on Paramount Global to abandon efforts to settle President Trump’s $20-billion lawsuit targeting CBS and “60 Minutes.”
Respected Washington litigator Abbe David Lowell this week joined the team representing the New York advocacy group, which has vowed to sue Paramount should it settle with Trump. The group owns Paramount shares.
Lowell, who has represented Hunter Biden, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, is working on the case with attorney Norm Eisen, a Trump critic who helped House Democrats with strategy during Trump’s first impeachment hearings in 2019.
Eisen is a former ambassador to the Czech Republic who served as White House ethics advisor under President Obama.
Late Thursday, the two attorneys sent a strongly worded letter to Paramount’s chairwoman and controlling shareholder Shari Redstone and other board members arguing that a Trump settlement would cause “catastrophic” harm to the embattled media company.
Hunter Biden, left, with his attorney Abbe Lowell, right, at a House committee hearing last year.
(Jose Luis Magana / Associated Press)
First Amendment experts have labeled Trump’s lawsuit frivolous. But Paramount leaders are desperate to end the Trump drama and some believe a truce could clear a path for the Federal Communications Commission to approve the company’s $8-billion sale to David Ellison’s Skydance Media.
Paramount needs the FCC to authorize the transfer of the CBS station licenses to the Ellison family.
The prospect of a Trump settlement has carved deep divisions within Paramount, which includes CBS News and “60 Minutes.”
“Trading away the credibility of CBS’s news division to curry favor with the Trump Administration is an improper and reckless act that will irreparably damage the company’s brand and destroy shareholder value,” Lowell said in a statement late Thursday.
“The board is legally and morally obligated to protect the company, not auction off its integrity for regulatory approval,” Lowell said.
The FCC review of Skydance’s proposed takeover of Paramount has become a slog. Skydance and Paramount face an October deadline to finalize the sale or the deal could collapse.
Paramount, in a statement, said that it is treating the FCC review and the Trump lawsuit as separate matters. “We will abide by the legal process to defend our case,” a corporate spokesman said.
Paramount’s lawyers entered mediation with the president’s legal team in late April, but no resolution has been reached. Paramount offered $15 million to Trump to end his suit, according to the Wall Street Journal, but the president rejected the overture and asked for more.
On Thursday, Redstone disclosed that she has been diagnosed with thyroid cancer and is receiving treatment. Last month, doctors removed her thyroid but cancer cells had spread to her vocal chords.
In their seven-page letter, Lowell and Eisen told Paramount’s leaders that, should they approve a Trump settlement to gain traction at the FCC, they would be violating their fiduciary duty to shareholders and potentially breaking federal anti-bribery statutes.
“We believe [a settlement] could violate laws prohibiting bribery of public officials, thereby causing severe and last damage to Paramount and its shareholders,” Lowell and Eisen wrote.
“To be as clear as possible, you control what happens next,” they said.
The admonition follows a similar warning from three U.S. senators — Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). In a May 19 letter, the senators wrote that paying money to Trump to help win clearance for the Paramount sale could constitute a bribe.
“It is illegal to corruptly give anything of value to public officials to influence an official act,” the three senators wrote in their letter.
In addition, two California Democrats have proposed a state Senate hearing to examine problems with a possible Trump settlement.
The senators invited two former CBS News executives — who both left, in large part, because of the controversy — to testify before a yet-unscheduled joint committee hearing in Sacramento.
The California lawmakers, in their letter, said a Trump settlement could also violate California’s Unfair Competition Law because it could disrupt the playing field for news organizations.
Earlier this week, Paramount asked shareholders to increase the size of its board to seven members at the company’s annual investor meeting next month.
The Freedom of the Press Foundation was created in 2012 to protect and defend public interest journalism.
This spring, Lowell left his former major law firm, Winston & Strawn, where he had been a partner for years. He formed his own boutique firm, Lowell & Associates, with a focus on “public interest representation in matters that defend the integrity of the legal system and protect individuals and institutions from government overreach,” according to its website.
Lowell’s firm also includes lawyer Brenna Frey, who made a high-profile exit from another prominent law firm, Skadden Arps, after it cut a deal with Trump to avoid becoming a target. That law firm agreed to provide $100 million in free legal services.
Last month, Frey appeared on CBS’ “60 Minutes” to air her decision to resign from Skadden Arps.
“I was able to tell my story on CBS’s ’60 Minutes’ because of the independence of a courageous news division, which is what’s at risk now,” Frey said in a statement.
Ras Baraka eyes New Jersey governor job after 11 years as Newark mayor
Homeland Security accelerates border wall construction in New Mexico and Arizona
8 now arrested in North Carolina house party shootings and more attempted-murder charges are filed
Gaschk elected to lead ND AFL-CIO
Opal Lee returns to Fort Worth after Ohio hospitalization
-
News1 week agoVideo: Faizan Zaki Wins Spelling Bee
-
Politics6 days agoMichelle Obama facing backlash over claim about women's reproductive health
-
News1 week agoVideo: Harvard Commencement Speaker Congratulates and Thanks Graduates
-
Politics1 week agoMusk officially steps down from DOGE after wrapping work streamlining government
-
News1 week agoPresident Trump pardons rapper NBA YoungBoy in flurry of clemency actions
-
Technology1 week agoAI could consume more power than Bitcoin by the end of 2025
-
Business1 week agoSix Flags to cut 135 jobs at Knott’s, Magic Mountain and other California parks
-
Technology1 week agoSEC drops Binance lawsuit in yet another gift to crypto