Government

Musk Gets Tossed Back To PA State Court In Lottery Case, Just In Time For Election

Sometimes gambits work.

By  
on
Milken Institute’s Global Conference Held In Beverly Hills

(Photo by Apu Gomes/Getty Images)

Elon Musk will get away with it.

The world’s richest man will dole out several more thinly disguised bribes in an attempt to sway the election results, and he will face no consequences. But he did get unceremoniously chucked back to state court by Judge Gerald Pappert, who flicked the thin-skinned billionaire aside like a bit of noxious pet dander clinging to his judicial robes — which is something anyway.

The case involved a civil action by Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, who is seeking to enjoin Musk from engaging in an illegal lottery through daily giveaways to registered voters who sign a petition pledging “support for the First and Second Amendments.”

Musk has been stumping for Donald Trump across Pennsylvania, donating upwards of $130 million to support the former president’s campaign, even as he rails against interference by philanthropist George Soros.

Judge Angelo Foglietta of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas ordered Musk to appear in Court on Thursday morning, but by then the case had been removed to federal court, where it landed on Judge Pappert’s docket.

Musk’s theory of jurisdiction is that, while the DA’s complaint is nominally about violating Pennsylvania’s consumer protection laws, it really pertains to the election, and thus presents an important federal question. He made an equally inscrutable argument that the DA is acting in his personal capacity as a citizen of Pennsylvania, and thus there is diversity between the parties. This requires ignoring Moor v. Alameda County, 411 U.S. 693, 717 (1973), in which the Supreme Court held that “a State is not a citizen for purposes of [] diversity jurisdiction.” But Musk and his lawyers are up to the task!

Sponsored

Last night, Krasner filed an emergency motion to remand the case to state court, pointing out that the amount in controversy is zero dollars, because the only relief sought is injunctive, and noting that there is Third Circuit precedent for sanctioning a party who removes a case without any objectively reasonable basis. And this morning, as per the court’s order, Musk responded by speculating that he could theoretically be fined, and so the court should simply infer that the case meets the $75,000 federal threshold.

Judge Pappert declined to make such an inference, remanding the case to state court because there is no federal question implicated and no jurisdiction for his court. But as it is now Friday, it’s more or less impossible that Judge Foglietta will schedule a hearing and enjoin Musk by election day. And so Musk’s gambit to delay the case with a pointless field trip to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appears to have worked.

Now we get to wait and see whether he was able to buy enough Pennsylvania voters to put Trump back in the White House.

Liz Dye lives in Baltimore where she produces the Law and Chaos substack and podcast.

Sponsored

Topics

, , , ,