On March 27, 2025, Elon Musk crossed yet another ethical and possibly criminal line in his long history of manipulating public narratives and markets. In a tweet viewed over 15 million times, Musk openly promised to give away two checks for $1 million each to attendees of a talk he planned in Wisconsin — but with a catch. Entry was limited to those who had voted in the Wisconsin Supreme Court election.
“Entrance is limited to those who have voted in the Supreme Court election. I will also personally hand over two checks for a million dollars each in appreciation for you taking the time to vote.”
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk), March 27, 2025
This tweet is not just reckless — it may well be illegal under federal election law.
Possible Violation of Federal Election Law
Under 18 U.S. Code § 597, it is unlawful to offer, make, or promise any payment or expenditure to induce someone to vote or refrain from voting. Musk’s offer of $2 million, explicitly tied to having voted in a specific election, falls squarely under this statute.
Legal experts and political commentators immediately flagged the tweet as potential voter bribery. The fact that the reward was conditioned upon voting — and tied directly to attendance at a public event — is not protected by free speech or typical campaign activity. It’s an offer of money contingent on participating in an election, which is illegal at both federal and state levels.
Whether Musk was serious, joking, or simply reckless does not matter. Under federal law, the offer itself is the crime.
A Pattern of Election Influence and Financial Manipulation
This is not the first time Musk has used his wealth and platform to interfere with democratic processes.
In the 2024 election cycle, Musk ran a similar “million-dollar giveaway” campaign in Pennsylvania, promoting sweepstakes offers that coincided with key voting periods and disproportionately targeted Republican-leaning districts. Critics argued this was an attempt to sway turnout in specific areas under the guise of “appreciation giveaways.”
Additionally, in recent months, Musk has become one of the largest private donors to Republican candidates and PACs, including significant contributions to state-level campaigns in Wisconsin, Texas, and Florida. This surge in political donations has coincided with:
- Increased regulatory scrutiny of Tesla and X (formerly Twitter)
- Multiple Tesla recalls, including the March 20, 2025 Cybertruck recall
- Ongoing lawsuits over Tesla’s deceptive Full Self-Driving marketing
- Public protests against Musk and Tesla at over 200 showroom locations globally
Observers see this flurry of political spending as a desperate scramble to curry favor with lawmakers and distract from mounting legal, financial, and public relations disasters.
Musk’s Threats Against Critics and Attempts to Control Speech
Around the same time as his Wisconsin tweet, Musk appeared on Fox News, openly threatening critics and promising to “go after” those who spread what he called “propaganda” against Tesla. He specifically claimed the administration would target those “providing the money” and “spreading lies” — even as he himself poured millions of dollars into influencing elections and public opinion.
This behavior mirrors reports that Musk privately pressured Reddit CEO Steve Huffman to suppress anti-Elon content. Following their exchange, Reddit temporarily banned several subreddits critical of Musk, including White People Twitter and Is Elon Dead Yet?
Musk’s long history of abusing power to retaliate against critics is well-documented, but his behavior during this period suggests a man increasingly panicked, erratic, and consumed with control.
Market Reaction and Broader Backlash
In the wake of Musk’s Wisconsin tweet and surrounding controversies:
- Tesla’s stock declined, adding to a month-long slide fueled by Cybertruck recalls, bad earnings, and global protests.
- The hashtag #TeslaTakedown trended as activists organized demonstrations at nearly 200 Tesla showrooms worldwide.
- Multiple civil rights organizations called for the Department of Justice to investigate Musk’s election-related activities.
Musk’s Wisconsin tweet was not an isolated misstep. It’s part of a pattern of unchecked political interference, retaliatory behavior, and desperation to maintain influence as his public standing crumbles.
Conclusion
Elon Musk’s brazen promise of $2 million conditioned on voting participation is a clear violation of U.S. election law — regardless of whether he claims it was a joke or publicity stunt. Combined with his financial manipulation of political campaigns, attempts to silence critics, and recent market turmoil, this incident further exposes the dangerous and destabilizing power Musk wields.
No billionaire should be allowed to buy influence over elections.
The question now is whether regulators, prosecutors, and the public will finally hold him accountable.
