Elon Musk Buys a Judge: Thanks Citizens United

Inside the Wisconsin Supreme Court race that’s exposing how billionaires are reshaping democracy.

This week, Elon Musk escalated his already aggressive efforts to influence the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, a race now becoming the most expensive judicial campaign in U.S. history.

Through his political vehicles—America PAC and Building America's Future—Musk has poured over $5 million into the campaign of conservative judge Brad Schimel, a former GOP attorney general with a hard-right legal record. But it’s not just the money that's grabbing attention—it’s the tactics.

Musk recently offered two $1 million checks to random petition-signers who supported a vague initiative opposing “activist judges.” Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul immediately called the move illegal, citing election bribery laws, and threatened legal action.

But last week, Wisconsin’s courts refused to block the giveaway, with Musk’s lawyers arguing the offer was just “free speech.” And just like that, a $1 million political lottery—thinly veiled voter influence—was greenlit by the courts

Independent News. Just $1/Week.
We just hit 10,000 subscribers—thank you! To celebrate, we’re offering full access to The Coffman Chronicle for just $1 a week ($52/year).

Get exclusive analysis, daily rundowns, and fearless reporting you won’t find in corporate media.

Support truth. Stay informed.

Why Wisconsin?

Because it’s everything right now.

• A swing state Trump won by just 0.9% in 2024.

• A state Supreme Court with a narrow 4–3 liberal majority.

• A court poised to rule on abortion access, redistricting, voting laws, and possibly future election disputes.

But Musk’s interest is also personal.

Tesla is suing the state over restrictions that prevent it from selling cars directly to consumers. If the case reaches the Wisconsin Supreme Court, Musk wants it to be heard by a judge he helped install.

This isn’t ideological. It’s transactional.

And the fate of Wisconsin may well indicate the will of the nation.

We’ve reported on the influence of politics on the courts before. See here:

Courts Under Attack: The GOP’s Radical Power Grab

The Death of Checks and Balances: How Trump Is Seizing Power While Congress and the Courts Watch

---

Why These Elections Are So Critical, and So Easy to Corrupt

State supreme courts decide the laws that govern everyday life: abortion rights, voting access, redistricting, education, labor protections, corporate accountability—the things that shape a society.

But despite their power, these elections are uniquely fragile:

• Low turnout. Most voters skip judicial races entirely or vote blindly.

• Little scrutiny. The media rarely covers them, and it’s too late when they do.

• Big money goes further. A few million dollars in a judicial race can dominate the airwaves, drown out local voices, and tip the outcome.

That makes them the perfect target for billionaires: low resistance, high return.

And it’s why Wisconsin matters so much. If Elon Musk can buy a seat on this court, he’s not just winning a case; he’s proving the system is for sale.

See our reporting on how the elite buy elections here:

Democracy for Sale: How Billionaires and Politicians Rig Elections

---

Why He Thinks He Can Pull It Off

Because he’s already done it on a much bigger stage.

In 2024, Musk funneled over $277 million into Donald Trump’s reelection effort via “independent” PACs like America PAC and RBG PAC. Trump won. Days later, Musk stood next to him at a press conference, unveiling the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a new federal office Musk now leads.

The PACs were technically “independent.” The rewards were not.

Now, he’s taking that same playbook to the state level.

Is This Even Legal?
Citizens United technically bans “coordination” between Super PACs and candidates. But in practice, the definition is so narrow it’s meaningless.

Musk spent over $200 million supporting Trump, campaigned with him, co-announced a federal department, and now runs it—with access to government contracts and records.

If that’s not coordination, what is?

Citizens United didn’t prevent corruption. It legalized it through semantics. Musk isn’t skirting the law. He’s showing us how little of it remains.

---

How Did We Get Here?

After Watergate, Congress passed sweeping reforms to curb political corruption: donation limits, financial disclosure, and the creation of the FEC.

Then, just two years later, the Supreme Court struck its first blow.

In 1976, Buckley v. Valeo ruled that while contribution limits were acceptable, spending money on your own campaign was protected speech. Just like that, the idea that “money = speech” entered American law. And those with the most money? Now entitled to the most speech.

Over the next three decades, this logic metastasized. Soft money loopholes exploded in the 1980s, and “Issue ads” became corporate megaphones in the ’90s. The McCain-Feingold Act tried to fix it in 2002, but the courts started gutting that, too.

By 2010, Citizens United took the final shot: corporations and billionaires could now spend unlimited money influencing elections—just not “coordinating” with candidates.

Then in 2014, McCutcheon removed limits on how much an individual could give across all campaigns.

---

Want to see just how systematically the system was dismantled?
Check out our master timeline graphic here, which shows the legal erosion, cultural glorification of wealth, and political distraction that made this moment possible.

---

The Cult of Wealth Made It All Feel Normal

While the courts were deregulating political influence, American culture was worshiping the wealthy more than ever.

In the 1980s, Dallas, Dynasty, and Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous turned billionaires into role models. By the 2000s, it was MTV Cribs, Keeping Up with the Kardashians, and the explosion of “boss babe” influencer culture.

Being rich wasn’t just aspirational; it became synonymous with intelligence, morality, and leadership. Hustle culture has become the measure of success. It is your fault if you aren’t working 120 hours a week and making bank.

So when Elon Musk buys a court seat or a federal department, it doesn’t look like corruption to many Americans. It looks like success.

---

Like so many of his ventures—Tesla, Twitter, even the rocket business—Elon Musk didn’t invent billionaire dominance of democracy. He just bought it, rebranded it, and marketed it more aggressively than anyone before him.

While they kept us distracted with the glittery spectacle of wealth, the powers that be kept us divided with culture wars. First, the moral panic of the War on Drugs, the Satanic Panic, and Tipper Gore’s crusade against lyrics and video games kept parents up at night; then it was bathrooms, litter boxes, Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and cancel culture. Because we can’t keep our eyes trained on what the elite are doing if we are too busy fighting imaginary dragons.

What It Means Now: Musk Isn’t the Problem—He’s the Prototype

Musk is not an outlier. He’s the case study for what Citizens United made possible.

• He funds the campaign.

• He gets the job.

• He keeps the contracts.

• He shapes the courts.

And if he flips Wisconsin’s judiciary to benefit his own company, he sets a precedent for every other billionaire to follow.

This isn’t the privatization of democracy.
It’s its replacement.

---

Call to Action: The Billionaires Are Organized. We Need to Be, Too.

We’re not powerless. But we are being outspent, outmaneuvered, and distracted.

Here’s what you can do:

• Share this piece. Awareness is the first disruption.

• Vote in state judicial races. This is where the front line is now.

• Support campaign finance reform. Demand transparency, caps, and public financing.

• Demand the overturn of Citizens United. Corporations aren’t people, and wealth is not speech. Democracy is one person, one vote. Period.

• Stop glorifying billionaires. They are not saviors. They’re strategic investors in power.

We’ll keep covering how the rich are reshaping the rules, and how we push back.

We just hit 10,000 subscribers—thank you! We’re offering full access to The Coffman Chronicle for just $1 a week ($52/year) to celebrate.

Bibliography:

• "Wisconsin attorney general sues Musk to block $1 million payment offers" Associated Press, March 28, 2025

• "Wisconsin Supreme Court race a litmus test for Elon Musk's political power" The Guardian, March 29, 2025

• "How Elon Musk, George Soros and Other Billionaires Are Shaping the Most Expensive Court Race in U.S. History" ProPublica, March 28, 2025

• "Elon Musk promised Wisconsin voters a $1 million reward. Is that legal?" Vox, March 28, 2025

• "Is Elon Musk's $1 million giveaway to Wisconsin Supreme Court voters legal?"
  Politico, March 28, 2025

• "Wisconsin Attorney General asks state Supreme Court to stop Elon Musk's $1M payments" CBS News, March 30, 2025

• "Citizens United Explained" Brennan Center for Justice, January 29, 2025

• "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" Federal Election Commission, January 21, 2010

• "Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission" Oyez, January 21, 2010