Wisconsin lawsuit seeks to ban Elon Musk from offering $1 million checks to voters
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — A government watchdog group in Wisconsin filed a lawsuit Wednesday seeking to prohibit billionaire Elon Musk from ever again offering cash payments to voters in the battleground state like he did in this spring's hotly contested Supreme Court race.
Musk handed out $1 million checks to three Wisconsin voters, including two in person just days before the state's April 1 Supreme Court election, in an effort to help elect conservative candidate Brad Schimel. Two weeks before the election, Musk's political action committee, America PAC, offered $100 to voters who signed a petition in opposition to 'activist judges," or referred someone to sign it.
It was all part of more than $20 million that Musk and groups he support spent on the race in an effort to flip majority control of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. More than $100 million was spent by both sides, making it the most expensive court race in U.S. history.
Musk's preferred candidate lost to Democratic-backed Susan Crawford by 10 percentage points. Her victory cemented the 4-3 liberal majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court until at least 2028.
Since that election, Musk announced he will spend less on political campaigns and then feuded publicly with President Donald Trump after exiting his administration.
The lawsuit filed Wednesday in state court by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign says that Musk's actions create "the risk that Wisconsin elections will become an open auction, where votes go to the preferred candidates of the highest bidders and the election outcome is determined by which candidate has a patron willing and able to pay the highest sum to Wisconsin voters.'
The lawsuit says that Musk and two groups he funds violated prohibitions on vote bribery and unauthorized lotteries and says his actions were an unlawful conspiracy and public nuisance. The lawsuit asks the court to order that Musk never offer similar payments to voters again.
There is another Wisconsin Supreme Court election in April. In November 2026, control of the Legislature and the governor's office, as well as the state's eight congressional districts, will be decided.
The latest lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign and a pair of voters by the liberal Wisconsin-based Law Forward and the Washington-based Democracy Defenders Fund. It was filed against Musk, his group America PAC that announced the petition and the Musk-funded group United States of America Inc. that made the payments.
The court that Crawford joins in August could ultimately hear the new lawsuit. Crawford would almost certainly be asked to recuse from the case, and if she did, the court would be left with a 3-3 split between conservative and liberal justices.
The current court, also controlled 4-3 by liberals, declined to hear a similar hastily filed lawsuit brought by Wisconsin's Democratic attorney general seeking to block Musk's handing out of two $1 million checks to voters two days before the election.
Two lower courts rejected that lawsuit before the Supreme Court declined to hear it on procedural grounds.
Musk's attorneys argued in that case that Musk was exercising his free speech rights with the giveaways and any attempt to restrict that would violate both the Wisconsin and U.S. constitutions.
Musk's political action committee used a nearly identical tactic before the presidential election last year, offering to pay $1 million a day to voters in Wisconsin and six other battleground states who signed a petition supporting the First and Second amendments. A judge in Pennsylvania said prosecutors failed to show the effort was an illegal lottery and allowed it to continue through Election Day.
A federal lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania in April alleges that Musk and his political action committee failed to pay more than $20,000 for getting people to sign that petition in 2024. America PAC on Monday filed a motion to dismiss. That case is pending.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
18 minutes ago
- Associated Press
ITM and Debiopharm Announce First Patient Imaged in New Study Arm of Phase 1/2 Trial Evaluating ITM-94 as Diagnostic Agent for Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (ccRCC)
Garching / Munich, Germany, and Lausanne, Switzerland - June 23, 2025 – ITM Isotope Technologies Munich SE (ITM), a leading radiopharmaceutical biotech company and Debiopharm, a Swiss-based, global biopharmaceutical company aiming to establish tomorrow's standard-of-care to cure cancer and infectious diseases, today announced that the first patient was imaged in a new study arm of a five-part, Phase 1/2 clinical trial (formerly GaLuCi™) (NCT05706129) evaluating the theranostic pair ITM-94/ITM-91 for identification and treatment of patients who have unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. As a new component of a broad clinical development plan for ITM-91/ITM-94, Part D of the trial will evaluate the effectiveness of ITM-94 in classifying indeterminate renal mass as either ccRCC or non-cancerous. ITM-91/ITM-94 is a first-in-class, peptide-based theranostic pair combining the radiotherapeutic compound ITM-91 (Debio 0228) ([177Lu]Lu-DPI-4452), with the diagnostic agent ITM-94 (Debio 0328) ([68Ga]Ga-DPI-4452) to target Carbonic Anhydrase IX (CAIX). CAIX is a cell surface protein that plays a key role in the tumor microenvironment, promoting tumor growth, survival, invasion and metastasis. In September 2024, ITM gained the exclusive worldwide license from Debiopharm for the development and commercial rights of ITM-91/ITM-94. The initiation of this study arm represents a significant advancement for ITM and Debiopharm following their licensing agreement. In the now initiated Part D of the trial, ITM-94 is being evaluated for its effectiveness to accurately classify an indeterminate renal mass as ccRCC or non-cancerous, when compared to CT/MRI imaging and histopathology. Secondary endpoints include sensitivity, specificity, and the positive and predictive value of ITM-94 PET/CT imaging compared to histopathology. This study arm is expected to enroll approximately 36 patients at around 15 clinical sites across the EU, US and Australia. ' The early results from the Gallium-68 CAIX PET/CT diagnostic are remarkable to date. I believe ITM-94 has the potential to change the way urologists and oncologists diagnose and stage patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma, improving accuracy and reducing the need for biopsies. I have not seen a tracer with a similar profile since the PSMA PET/CT was established,' added Prof. Michael Hofman, Director, Prostate Cancer Theranostics and Imaging Centre of Excellence (ProSTIC), Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. ' Clear cell renal cell carcinoma is the most common form of kidney cancer, with more than 90% of cases overexpressing the CAIX encoding gene. As survival rates are highly dependent on the stage of progression, rapid and precise diagnosis is essential to provide patients with the best possible treatment options and therapeutic outcomes. ITM-94 has already demonstrated potential exceptional imaging qualities, including high tumor-to-background ratios and detecting lesions not visible by CT scan with a potential favorable safety profile. We look forward to exploring the full potential of the theranostic pair ITM-91/ITM-94 across this trial to characterize and treat CAIX expressing cancer cells, advancing the efficacy of targeted radiopharmaceutical therapies,' said Dr. Celine Wilke, Chief Medical Officer of ITM. ' With high-quality imaging and high tumor uptake, ITM-94 has already demonstrated potentially significant diagnostic capabilities in solid tumors. The data gathered in Part D of the trial will be instrumental to the further validation of this theranostic pair. We highly value our partnership with ITM, which will continue to advance the rapid progression of these novel radio-diagnostics and -therapeutics through the clinic,' said Angela Zubel, Chief Development Officer, Research & Development at Debiopharm. About the Phase 1/2 ITM-91/ITM-94 Trial The five-part clinical trial (NCT05706129) is designed to assess the safety and tolerability, imaging characteristics, and efficacy of the theranostic pair ITM-91/ITM-94 in patients with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors. In Part A of the trial, ITM-94 demonstrated exceptional tumor imaging characteristics, with a high tumor-to-background ratio and a favorable tolerability profile in patients with confirmed ccRCC, with results published in the Journal of Nuclear Medicine. Part B, which is ongoing, is assessing escalating doses of the therapeutic agent, ITM-91, in patients whose tumors show high uptake of the imaging tracer. Based on the recommended dose from Part B, Part C of the trial will assess the safety and preliminary efficacy of ITM-91 in patients with ccRCC, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, colorectal cancer, urothelial carcinoma and potentially other tumor types. In addition to the newly initiated Part D, Part E will assess ITM-94 uptake in other tumors. ITM will assume full sponsorship of the program from Debiopharm once the transfer is completed. About ITM-91/ITM-94 (Debio 0228/ 0328) ITM-91/ITM-94 is an investigational theranostic pair originally discovered by 3B Pharmaceuticals GmbH and now exclusively licensed to ITM. ITM-94 ([68Ga]Ga-DPI-4452) is a PET imaging agent that may be used independently and is designed to identify patients whose cancers overexpress CAIX. Once identified, these patients may be treated with the lutetium-labelled radioligand, ITM-91 ([177Lu]Lu-DPI-4452), which delivers targeted radiation to the tumor with the aim to destroy it from the inside. About ITM Isotope Technologies Munich SE ITM, a leading radiopharmaceutical biotech company, is dedicated to providing a new generation of radiopharmaceutical therapeutics and diagnostics for hard-to-treat tumors. We aim to meet the needs of cancer patients, clinicians and our partners through excellence in development, production and global supply. With improved patient benefit as the driving principle for all we do, ITM advances a broad precision oncology pipeline, including multiple Phase 3 studies, combining the company's high-quality radioisotopes with a range of targeting molecules. By leveraging our two decades of pioneering radiopharma expertise, central industry position and established global network, ITM strives to provide patients with more effective targeted treatment to improve clinical outcome and quality of life. Debiopharm's commitment to patients Debiopharm aims to develop innovative therapies that target high unmet medical needs in oncology and bacterial infections. Bridging the gap between disruptive discovery products and real-world patient reach, we identify high-potential compounds and technologies for in-licensing, clinically demonstrate their safety and efficacy, and then select large pharmaceutical commercialization partners to maximize patient access globally. For more information, please visit We are on X. Follow us @DebiopharmNews at or on LinkedIn. ITM Contact Corporate Communications Kathleen Noonan/Julia Westermeir Phone: +49 89 329 8986 1500 Email: [email protected] Investor Relations Ben Orzelek Phone: +49 89 329 8986 1009 Email: [email protected] Debiopharm Contact Dawn Bonine - Head of Communications [email protected] Tel: +41 (0)21 321 01 11 Attachment
CNN
20 minutes ago
- CNN
Supreme Court prepares to release major opinions on birthright citizenship, LGBTQ books, porn sites
From digging into President Donald Trump's battle with the courts to deciding whether people can be required to identify themselves before viewing porn online, the Supreme Court in the coming days will deliver its most dramatic decisions of the year. With most of its pending rulings complete, the justices are now working toward issuing the final flurry of opinions that could have profound implications for the Trump administration, the First Amendment and millions of American people. Already, the conservative Supreme Court has allowed states to ban transgender care for minors — a blockbuster decision that could have far-reaching consequences — sided with the Food and Drug Administration's denial of vaping products and upheld Biden-era federal regulations that will make it easier to track 'ghost guns.' Here are some of the most important outstanding cases: The first argued appeal involving Trump's second term has quickly emerged as the most significant case the justices will decide in the coming days. The Justice Department claims that three lower courts vastly overstepped their authority by imposing nationwide injunctions that blocked the president from enforcing his order limiting birthright citizenship. Whatever the justices say about the power of courts to halt a president's executive order on a nationwide basis could have an impact beyond birthright citizenship. Trump has, for months, vociferously complained about courts pausing dozens of his policies with nationwide injunctions. While the question is important on its own — it could shift the balance of power between the judicial and executive branches — the case was supercharged by the policy at issue: Whether a president can sign an executive order that upends more than a century of understanding, the plain text of the 14th Amendment and multiple Supreme Court precedents pointing to the idea that people born in the US are US citizens. During the May 15 arguments, conservative and liberal justices seemed apprehensive to let the policy take effect. The high court is also set to decide whether a school district in suburban Washington, DC, burdened the religious rights of parents by declining to allow them to opt their elementary-school children out of reading LGBTQ books in the classroom. As part of its English curriculum, Montgomery County Public Schools approved a handful of books in 2022 at issue. One, 'Prince & Knight,' tells the story of a prince who does not want to marry any of the princesses in his realm. After teaming up with a knight to slay a dragon, the two fall in love, 'filling the king and queen with joy,' according to the school's summary. The parents said the reading of the books violated their religious beliefs. The case arrived at the Supreme Court at a moment when parents and public school districts have been engaged in a tense struggle over how much sway families should have over instruction. The Supreme Court's conservative majority signaled during arguments in late April that it would side with the parents in the case, continuing the court's yearslong push to expand religious rights. The court is juggling several major cases challenging the power of federal agencies. One of those deals with the creation of a task force that recommends which preventive health care services must be covered at no cost under Obamacare. Though the case deals with technical questions about who should appoint the members of a board that makes those recommendations, the decision could affect the ability of Americans to access cost-free services under the Affordable Care Act such as certain cancer screenings and PrEP drugs that help prevent HIV infections. During arguments in late April, the court signaled it may uphold the task force. The court also seemed skeptical of a conservative challenge to the Universal Service Fund, which Congress created in 1996 to pay for programs that expand broadband and phone service in rural and low-income communities. Phone companies contribute billions to that fund, a cost that is passed on to consumers. A conservative group challenged the fund as an unconstitutional 'delegation' of the power of Congress to levy taxes. If the court upholds the structure of the programs' funding, that would represent a departure from its trend in recent years of limiting the power of agencies to act without explicit approval from Congress. For years, the Supreme Court has considered whether congressional districts redrawn every decade violate the rights of Black voters under the landmark 1965 Voting Rights Act. This year, the justices are being asked by a group of White voters whether Louisiana went so far in adding a second Black-majority district that it violated the 14th Amendment. The years-old, messy legal battle over Louisiana's districts raises a fundamental question about how much state lawmakers may think about race when drawing congressional maps. The answer may have implications far beyond the Bayou State, particularly if a majority of the court believes it is time to move beyond policies intended to protect minority voters that were conceived during the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Arguments in the case, which took place in March, were mixed. A ruling against Louisiana would likely jeopardize the state's second Black and Democratic-leaning congressional district, currently held by Rep. Cleo Fields, a Democrat. And any change to Fields' territory could affect the boundaries of districts held by House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise. The justices will also decide a fight that erupted in 2018 when South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster yanked Medicaid funding for the state's two Planned Parenthood clinics. Technically, the legal dispute isn't about abortion — federal and state law already bar Medicaid from paying for that procedure — but a win for South Carolina could represent a financial blow to an entity that provides access to abortion in many parts of the country. McMaster, a Republican, argued the payments were a taxpayer subsidy for abortion. McMaster's order had the effect of also blocking patients from receiving other services at Planned Parenthood. A patient named Julie Edwards, who has diabetes, and Planned Parenthood South Atlantic sued the state, noting that federal law gives Medicaid patients a right to access care at any qualified doctor's office willing to see them. The legal dispute for the court deals with whether Medicaid patients have a right to sue to enforce requirements included in spending laws approved by Congress — in this case, the mandate that patients can use the benefit at any qualified doctor's office. Without a right to sue, Planned Parenthood argues, it would be impossible to enforce those requirements. The Supreme Court has tended to view such rights-to-sue with skepticism, though a 7-2 majority found such a right in a related case two years ago. The court is expected to release more opinions Thursday and will need at least one other day — and possibly several more — to finish its work.
Indianapolis Star
24 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
Why won't Republicans call on Joe Hogsett to resign?
It is shocking that only one out of six Republicans on the Indianapolis City-County Council have called on Mayor Joe Hogsett to resign following sexual harassment allegations that have rocked his office in recent months. Many constituents of Republican councilors are frustrated that their caucus has been more passive than council Democrats, three of whom are on record saying Hogsett should resign. It is hard to trust your leaders when they stay silent about a moral and ethical issue, especially involving one of their political enemies. If anyone should have the courage to speak up, it should be Republicans. Unlike their Democratic colleagues, Republicans don't have to worry about Hogsett continuing to be a power broker in their party for several years due to their trouble building an independent political machine. '[Calling on Hogsett to resign] could cause personal financial hardship to people,' Democratic Councilor Jesse Brown, the first to call on Hogsett to resign, told me. '[And he] is in good with all the biggest donors and he has a ton of money in the bank and so … he absolutely could you know levy those connections or that money to sink people's political careers.' Briggs: Hogsett's texts to women show Indianapolis mayor embodied toxic culture When I asked Republican Minority Leader Michael-Paul Hart why he hasn't called on Hogsett to resign, he said he didn't want to get political. He has focused his criticism on the investigation into Hogsett, rather than Hogsett himself. After all, many are starting to think the investigation was just a PR stunt aimed at clearing him of legal liability. 'I try to be as apolitical as possible because I think local government is just non-political … we're always talking about roads, water, trash, public safety,' Hart said. 'At the end of the day, we've got to focus on what we can control and what is symbolic.' Gov. Mike Braun expressed a similar sentiment when asked by WIBC-FM (93.1) host Nigel Laskowski about the scandal. 'What I'm more concerned about would be the potholes per linear mile,' Braun said June 18. I don't think fixing potholes, criticizing a political process and taking a moral stance against political leaders engaging in ethical violations should be mutually exclusive. However, Hogsett still controls the city budget and Council President Vop Osili appears to be positioning himself to succeed Hogsett. Either person could retaliate against Republicans who chose to make trouble and divert city funds away from their districts. Opinion: I was dragged out by sheriff's deputies. Indiana Democrats stayed silent. 'I try to remind folks all the time there's … 240,000 people that the six of us (Republicans) represent and I would certainly not want them to be disenfranchised,' Hart told me when I asked if he thought Hogsett would retaliate against Republicans. 'But I would hope that the mayor wouldn't punish the people of our districts for something of that nature.' Several councilors and their employers are also financially dependent on contracts with the city-county government, which Hogsett could push to terminate if councilors call on him to resign. Hart, for example, is employed as a director by SHI International, which has a six million dollar contract through 2027 with Indianapolis. The risk of retaliation, however, did not stop both Democratic and Republican leaders from calling on former Attorney General Curtis Hill to resign after he faced allegations of groping, and did not stop both Democratic and Republican leaders from condemning former Indiana Senate Minority Leader Greg Taylor after he faced allegations of sexual harassment. Taking the personal risk to call for greater ethical standards for political leaders may not fix the roads, but it will do something just as important. It will rebuild public trust in local leaders by providing some concrete evidence that they subscribe to a set of moral standards, and that they want our political system to be just and fair for both their constituents and employees.
