3 ms·
I'm kind of confused here. The article says that the giveaway is for signing a petition saying you support free speech and gun rights. The legal argument is th
by themaninthedark 2y ago
I'm kind of confused here. The article says that the giveaway is for signing a petition saying you support free speech and gun rights.
The legal argument is that it is illegal to buy votes or pay for someone to register to vote...but signing a petition is not voting and the article says the petition is only open to registered voters.
- belter 2y agohttps://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/egpbjmwkkpq/PA%20v%20Musk%20-%20complaint%20-%2020241028.pdf https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/egpbjmwkkpq/... The case has wisely been set as a state law enforcement matter rather than a federal election law case. This strengthens their position by keeping it focused on clear state statutory violations of Pennsylvania law. The law is very clear that unauthorized lotteries are illegal.
- themaninthedark 2y agoOk, I know some states have rather strict sweepstakes and lottery laws. Why the article goes on to talk about other federal laws rather then show that the case is solely built on state law is kinda confusing...