Authored by Kimberley Hayek via The Epoch Times,
A bipartisan Wisconsin elections panel has determined there is probable cause that Elon Musk broke state law by offering two $1 million checks to voters during last year’s hotly contested Supreme Court race.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission voted 5-1 last week to file two complaints against the billionaire with Brown County District Attorney David Lasee. Prosecutors have 40 days to decide whether to file criminal charges under the state’s election bribery statute. That law blocks offering anything of value to entice someone to vote.
The complaints arose from Musk’s actions in the days before the April 1, 2025, election. He posted on X promising $1 million prizes and gave out two oversized checks at a Green Bay rally to supporters who signed a petition against “activist judges.” The recipients were Nicholas Jacobs and Ekaterina Diestler.
The commission said Musk’s social media promise and the public giveaway were meant to induce individuals to vote in that Supreme Court contest. Musk donated and backed groups in the race to help conservative candidate Brad Schimel flip the court’s liberal majority.
Musk’s spokespeople did not immediately return a request for comment.
Democrat-backed Susan Crawford defeated Schimel by approximately 10 percentage points. The loss came despite Musk-connected efforts spending tens of millions. Total spending in the race broke records, surpassing $100 million and rendering it the most expensive judicial contest in American history.
On March 30, 2025, Musk hosted a town hall in Green Bay, donning a cheesehead hat, and made a show of awarding the prizes. He told the crowd the race could impact the future of the state, the House of Representatives, and even “Western civilization.”
“The Wisconsin Supreme Court is able to redraw the districts,” he said at the event.
“They will gerrymander the district and deprive Wisconsin of two seats on the Republican side.”
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, tried to prevent the payouts. He filed emergency lawsuits arguing they violated laws against using money to influence votes. Lower courts turned him down. The state Supreme Court itself, with its liberal majority, refused to hear the last-minute appeal without explanation.
Kaul’s office had said it was committed to “safe, secure, free and fair” elections. But the payments were made anyway.
Crawford’s victory maintained the 4-3 liberal sway on the court. Conservatives had hoped a new majority could help redraw congressional maps and bolster Republican influence in Washington.
Musk later signaled he'd slow down political spending, and his side framed the checks as rewards for petition signers and publicity, not direct vote-buying. Similar complaints were lodged around Musk’s $100 offers for petition signatures in other states.