Arizona Judge Allows Fake Electors to Challenge Charges Under Free Speech Law

News
Amanda Austin
February 11, 2025
0
56
7 minutes read

Donald Trump held a campaign rally at the Lancaster Airport located in Lititz, Pennsylvania. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

An Arizona judge has granted a key legal victory to Republican operatives facing felony charges for falsely certifying Donald Trump as the winner of the state’s 2020 election, allowing them to argue their case under Arizona’s anti-SLAPP law.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sam Myers ruled Monday that the defendants could proceed with a motion claiming that their prosecution violates protections against lawsuits designed to suppress free speech and political activity, KJZZ-FM reported.

“The court finds that the defendant’s motions do include information that the charges in this case include, at least in part, some arguably lawful exercise of their rights of petition and speech,” Myers wrote in his decision.

The defendants—often referred to as “fake electors”—were indicted on fraud and forgery-related charges for submitting a document falsely declaring Trump the winner of Arizona’s electoral votes over Joe Biden. However, they argue that their actions fall under constitutional protections.

Arizona’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) law, which has traditionally applied to civil cases, allows defendants to seek dismissal if they can demonstrate that the legal action against them was primarily intended to deter, retaliate against, or prevent their exercise of constitutional rights.

The judge’s ruling is just the first step in the legal battle. Myers gave Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office 45 days to respond, setting up the next phase of the case. “In this step two, the state will have the opportunity to show that the charges are justified by clearly established law and that the Attorney General did not act in order to deter, prevent, or retaliate against the moving parties’ exercise of their constitutional rights,” Myers wrote.

Mayes, a Democrat, quickly responded, saying her office strongly disagrees with the ruling and plans to appeal. “It is not the lawful exercise of free speech to file forged slates of electors to deprive Arizona voters of their right to vote,” Mayes said in a statement.

The case is part of a broader legal effort to hold individuals accountable for attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. As the legal battle continues, the decision could set a precedent for similar cases nationwide.