MADISON, Wis. — Wisconsin’s attorney general on Sunday asked the liberal-controlled state Supreme Court to stop billionaire Elon Musk from handing over $1 million checks to two voters, a request that came hours before President Donald Trump’s ally planned the giveaway at an evening rally.

Two lower courts already rejected the legal challenge by Democrat Josh Kaul, who argues that Musk’s offer violates a state law. “Wisconsin law prohibits offering anything of value to induce anyone to vote,” Kaul argued in his filing. “Yet, Elon Musk did just that.”

Musk’s attorneys argued in filings with the court that Musk was exercising his free speech rights with the giveaways and any attempt to restrict that would violate both the Wisconsin and U.S. constitutions.

The payments are “intended to generate a grassroots movement in opposition to activist judges, not to expressly advocate for or against any candidate,” Musk’s attorneys argued in court filings.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch

Wisconsin’s tightly contested Supreme Court election, where ideological control of the court is at stake, is on Tuesday. Liberals currently hold a 4-3 majority.

The court’s four liberal justices have endorsed Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, the Democratic-backed candidate.

Musk’s attorneys, about four hours before the rally was to begin, asked that two liberal justices who have campaigned for Crawford – Jill Karofsky and Rebecca Dallet – recuse themselves from the case. His attorneys argued their work for Crawford creates “the specter of inappropriate bias.” If they did recuse, that would leave the court with a 3-2 conservative majority.

One of the court’s conservative justices has endorsed Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, who also has the backing of Trump and Musk. Schimel wore a “Make America Great Again Hat” while campaigning Sunday.

At the rally scheduled in Green Bay for 6:30 p.m. CST, Musk promised to hand over a pair of $1 million checks to voters who signed an online petition against “activist” judges. Musk and groups he supports have spent more than $20 million to help Schimel get elected.

Schimel said in a national television interview that he does not control “any of the spending from any outside group, whether it’s Elon Musk or anyone else” and that all Trump asked was whether he would “reject activist judges” and follow the law.

“That’s exactly what I’ve committed to anybody, whether it’s President Trump, Elon Musk or any donors and donors or supporters or voters in Wisconsin. That’s my commitment,” Schimel told “Fox News Sunday.”

Schimel has not said whether he would attend the rally.

Crawford’s campaign declined comment on Kaul’s legal filing.

The contest has shattered national spending records for a judicial election, with more than $81 million in spending.

Musk’s political action committee used a nearly identical tactic before the presidential election last year, offering to pay $1 million a day to voters in Wisconsin and six other battleground states who signed a petition supporting the First and Second Amendments. A judge in Pennsylvania said prosecutors failed to show the effort was an illegal lottery and allowed it to continue through Election Day.

Musk on Friday initially said in a post on his social media platform, X, that he planned to “personally hand over” $2 million to a pair of voters who have already cast their ballots in the race.

Musk later posted a clarification, saying the money would go to people who will be “spokesmen” for an online petition against “activist” judges. After first saying the event would only be open to people who had voted in the Supreme Court race, he said attendance would be limited to those who have signed the petition.

Also on Friday, Musk’s political action committee identified the recipient of its first $1 million giveaway – a Green Bay man who had donated to the Wisconsin GOP and the conservative candidate in the court race, and who has a history of posting support for Trump and his agenda.

The judicial election comes as Wisconsin’s highest court is expected to rule on abortion rights, congressional redistricting, union power and voting rules that could affect the 2026 midterms and the 2028 presidential election in the state.

Associated Press writer Gary Fields in Washington contributed to this report.