• Mog_fanatic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Unless I have the law wrong, he skirted the law. He didn’t pay anyone to vote (although he originally said he was), he technically only paid them to sign a petition. The law afaik only says you can’t pay people to vote (regardless of who, in Wisconsin you straight up cannot pay people to vote at all), you can pay them to sign a petition.

    However I would argue that by first announcing that the money would go only to people who voted and then subtly changing it later is still totally a form of bribery. People absolutely voted for a chance at that money because of his original statement and didn’t know it changed. But I’m going to go out on a limb here and say he’ll be 100% fine because of technicalities (aka he’s rich as shit and is completely untouchable)

      • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well you can read it here, the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s four liberal and three conservative justices unanimously declined to hear the case, without elaborating further.