PHILADELPHIA — A federal judge has declined to accept oversight of the lawsuit filed against Elon Musk by Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, the latest chapter in the legal bout unfolding between Krasner and Musk ahead of Election Day.

The decision, issued Friday afternoon by U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, rejected a request by Musk’s lawyers to have the case proceed through the federal system — and sends the matter back to Philadelphia’s Common Pleas Court, where Krasner had initially filed a complaint earlier this week.

It was not immediately clear how quickly Common Pleas Court Judge Angelo Foglietta might set a hearing in the case. Krasner’s attorneys have asked the courts to move quickly. He seeking to stop Musk from giving away money to registered voters in Pennsylvania before next week’s presidential election.

Foglietta said at a brief hearing in his courtroom Thursday that he would be ready to quickly schedule the matter if it was sent back to him from the federal bench.

“I’m here,” he said. “I’ll be here.”

Krasner, a Democrat, sued Musk and his PAC earlier this week, saying the PAC’s daily $1 million awards to registered voters in battleground states — including Pennsylvania — violated the state’s lottery and consumer protection laws.

Musk, who has become a top surrogate for Republican nominee Donald Trump, has denied that, casting his contest as a way to drive up GOP voter registration numbers in states that might decide the election.

Although election law experts and the Justice Department have warned that Musk’s giveaways appear to violate federal laws banning monetary inducements to vote, Krasner’s suit took a slightly different approach. His lawyers said the contest constituted a lottery, which under Pennsylvania law can only be run by the state and for the benefit of seniors who live there.

Krasner’s suit also said America PAC was violating Pennsylvania’s consumer protection laws, including by failing to publish detailed rules or odds of winning, and declining to say or demonstrate how participants’ personal information was being protected.

Musk’s attorneys, led by Matthew Haverstick, sought to have the case reclassified as a federal matter, arguing that because it concerned a presidential election, it should not be handled by a state judge.

But Krasner’s attorneys disagreed, saying in court documents: “The Complaint concerns only Pennsylvania public nuisance and lottery law, and Pennsylvania (consumer protection) law.”

Pappert evidently agreed.

In a brief opinion accompanying his decision, the judge said, in essence, that although Krasner’s suit is intersecting with a looming federal election, the laws he is seeking to employ against Musk and his PAC are Pennsylvania statutes — making it a matter for a local court to decide.

John Summers, one of Krasner’s lawyers, said Musk’s attempt to reclassify the case as a federal one was a delay tactic, calling it a “stunt” and a way to “run the clock until election day” in order to continue handing out cash prizes.

“Justice delayed in stopping illegal activity that harms Philadelphians and undermines their free, fair, and final elections is justice denied,” Summers wrote in court documents.

©2024 The Philadelphia Inquirer, LLC. Visit at inquirer.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.