The Daily Pulse

Technology

Musk settles fraud suits over $1 million voter sweepstakes

Reported by Neha Sharma (Staff Writer) · The Verge ·

Unconfirmed — Reported by one source so far

Reported by one source so far

Worth knowing
Musk settles fraud suits over $1 million voter sweepstakesPhoto: Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk has agreed to settle two lawsuits that accused his $1 million‑a‑day voter giveaway of being a fraud. The suits were filed by two Arizona residents in Austin, Texas, and the settlement amount has not been disclosed. Musk’s promise in 2024 to award a daily $1 million prize to a randomly chosen registered voter in a swing state sparked legal challenges and questions about its legality. Philadelphia’s District Attorney sued to block the giveaway, calling it an illegal lottery. During a hearing, Chris Gober, representing Musk’s America PAC, told the judge that “The $1 million recipients are not chosen by chance … We know exactly who will be announced as the $1 million recipient today and tomorrow,” directly contradicting Musk’s claim of random selection. The plaintiffs said they would not have signed the required petition to enter the sweepstakes had they known the drawings were not random. They also accused Musk and America PAC of using the petition to harvest personal data, noting the petition placed no limits on how the data could be used or sold and gave no details about its intended use. ## Context These lawsuits highlight how political fundraising tactics that resemble sweepstakes can run afoul of state gambling laws and raise privacy concerns when personal information is collected without clear safeguards.

ExplainerWhy this matters

What Happened

Elon Musk’s 2024 promise of a $1 million daily prize to a randomly selected voter led to two fraud lawsuits by Arizona residents, which have now been settled for an undisclosed amount.

Why It Matters

The case underscores how sweepstakes tied to political causes can be judged as illegal lotteries under state law, prompting legal scrutiny. It also raises broader concerns about data privacy, as the entry petition allowed extensive collection of personal information without clear usage limits, a practice that could affect voter trust and trigger regulatory action.

What Happens Next

Authorities may continue to examine similar political fundraising methods for compliance with gambling statutes and data‑protection rules. Ongoing monitoring could result in further legal challenges or new guidelines to ensure transparency in how voter data is gathered and used.

Read more at The Verge →