Emily Fritz | a&e editor

In his most recent efforts to increase political engagement on behalf of former President Donald Trump, Elon Musk has used his political action committee (PAC), America PAC, to incentivize voters, promising to pay registered voters in pivotal swing states in exchange for their signature on a petition in support of the First and Second amendments.

Legal experts have warned that this action may be against federal law — as paying people to register to vote is illegal — leading the U.S. Department of Justice to issue a warning and Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner to file a lawsuit against him.

But with a net worth of $271 billion, according to Forbes, the legal action is doing little to deter Musk from continuing to offer voters in battleground states financial rewards for their participation.

Ignoring, briefly, the irony of Musk interfering with our federal election in service of his own self interests, it is infuriating that he is able to disregard the warning and lawsuit against him simply because he can afford to.

“In appreciation for your support, you will receive $47 for each registered voter you refer that signs this petition,” the America PAC said online. “This program is exclusively open to registered voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin and North Carolina. Expires Nov. 5.”

Prior to Oct. 29, the super PAC was offering an increased incentive of $100 for every signer and $100 for every referral for Pennsylvania voters.

Additionally, Musk had been randomly awarding $1 million to a signer of the PAC’s petition on a daily basis. In terms of his wealth, this grand prize accounts for 0.000369003% of his overall fortune. In other words, Musk is awarding his pocket change to a few lucky individuals willing to throw their name behind this potentially illegal attempt to violate election law.

“In the end, this violates the federal statute against paying someone to register to vote for a federal election,” professor of campaign finance law at Northwestern University Michael Kang told The Verge. “This isn’t paying someone to register to vote, but requiring them to be a registered voter in order to qualify for the prize.”

While increasing voter registration is a fine outcome, whether people choose to register at all should be of their own volition. Should Musk’s super PAC be used as any form of data-driven litmus in support of the First or Second Amendments later on, those who traded their names for $47 may wish they hadn’t.

The incentivization of voter registration through cash giveaways this year has made the news far more than it has in previous years, but the fact remains the same: Legal experts are deeming this as illegal activity.

For the wealthy and powerful, the concept of illegality doesn’t hold the same weight as it would for people in the middle- or lower-class, similar to how their voice is louder than the average voter. Money talks.

Musk isn’t the first to evade consequences because of the size of his bank account, though. As a convicted felon on 34 counts, Trump isn’t only able to walk freely, but run for and hold our highest office. Punishment for their crimes hardly holds a candle to their resources, which includes an estimated net worth of $8 billion for Trump, according to Forbes.

It is possible to sue someone for more than they’re worth — if they’re worth less than the loss that they’re liable for. For giants like Musk and Trump, these are far-reaching numbers on any case. Even if successfully reprimanded for his actions, Musk will be able to relieve himself of any fees or penalties with a personal check.  

Despite what’s in his metaphorical wallet, Musk will also walk away socially unscathed. Using a platform that he has earned from his status as CEO and public nuisance, he has little left to lose in terms of reputation.

Since the assassination attempts on Trump, Musk has tried several times — unsuccessfully — to joke about an attempt on Vice President Kamala Harris’ life, on the social platform X. After probing by the Secret Service, Musk took the post down but later returned to the poorly crafted “punchline” on an interview with Tucker Carlson and again at the Life Center megachurch in Harrisburg, Pa.

​​“No one’s even bothering to try to kill Kamala,” he said to Pennsylvanians, who finally rewarded Musk with the validation that he’d been seeking all along: a laughing audience reaffirming his popularity among fascists.

Aside from his brief run-in with federal agents about his remarks, Musk faces little to no negative impact from exercising his right to free speech in the most egregious ways.

Following the 2024 Paris Summer Olympics, Algerian boxer Imane Khelif filed a defamation lawsuit against the billionaire and his co-conspirator J.K. Rowling over false accusations that Khelif was a transgender woman. The lawsuit is still ongoing, but it is unlikely that any financial reparations required of Musk will impact him in a meaningful way.

As an avid practitioner of free speech, evident by his super PAC and his swiftness to spew whatever he chooses, Musk often fails to recognize that there are consequences for his words and his actions.

More importantly, if he is successful in skewing the election in favor of the Republican Party, we may see him hold a cabinet position in a second Trump term. As someone who achieves the majority of his wealth through government contracting, this increase in power would be unprecedented, effectively elevating Musk from unaffected to untamable.