A US judge has ruled that a lawsuit regarding an election ‘lottery’ run by Elon Musk during the 2024 presidential election can move ahead.
The lottery was launched during Musk’s Donald Trump campaign in the November election, with the Republican candidate emerging victorious in a race many believe the South African businessman was instrumental in helping secure.
During this campaign, Musk launched a petition which gave voters the opportunity to win a $1m prize in a daily giveaway. People who signed the petition, which was to support the US Constitution, were entered into the draw.
However, some voters since took umbrage with the lottery, claiming that there was actually no way to claim the prize and so they were being duped into signing Musk’s petition with the promise of a potential financial reward.
McAferty v. Musk et al was subsequently launched by Jacqueline McAferty, an Arizona resident, on 5 November. McAftery argued that Musk and his America PAC political action committee had encouraged voters to sign the petition and hand over personal information.
Media reports have cited certain legal and political figures as hardly criticising Musk’s petition and its associated lottery for some time. Christopher Peterson, a University of Utah law professor, spoke to NBC News on the day McAftery filed the suit.
“You cannot lawfully lie to the public about conducting a random sweepstakes, lottery, or contest and then rig the results to hand-select the winners. It really is not complicated. This is just fraud; a simple, ugly fraud on the public.”
Federal Judge Robert Pitman of the Texas Western District Court has now opted not to dismiss the lawsuit, meaning Musk will now have to face the lawsuit – though it’s fair to say that the world’s richest man will likely have a lot of legal resources at his disposal to fight back.
He was quoted by Reuters as saying: “It is plausible that plaintiff justifiably relied on those statements to believe that defendants were objectively offering her the chance to enter a random lottery — even if that is not what they subjectively intended to do.”