PHOENIX — The people accused of being "fake electors'' and their allies are officially off the legal hook — for now.
In a new order, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sam Myers granted the motion by Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes to drop the charges of fraud, forgery and conspiracy that were originally filed in 2024 against 11 Republicans who claimed that Donald Trump won the 2020 election and that they were entitled to cast their electoral votes for him despite the fact the official returns showed Joe Biden won Arizona by 10,457 votes.
Myers also dismissed the charges against other defendants including aides and attorneys for Trump who Mayes said were part of crafting a plan for Arizona and other swing states to throw the electoral count in doubt. That would have denied Biden the necessary 270 electoral votes and left it to Congress to decide who won.
People are also reading…
But the judge, in his formal order, agreed to the attorney general's request to make the dismissal "without prejudice.'' That means Mayes is free to refile the case if and when she is ready to make another try to get convictions.
The order came despite arguments by several defendants who sought to have the case go away permanently. They told Myers that he should not allow the risk of future prosecution to remain given the passage of time, the amount of money they have spent, the stress caused to the defendants, and what they called "fundamental fairness'' and "in the interests of justice.''
Mark Williams, representing former Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, specifically said that the case brought by the state was "frivolous.''
"It was brought to punish Mr. Giuliani and the other defendants for exercising rights,'' he said.
The judge, however, didn't see it that way.
"While the court does not discount the significance of those circumstances, the court finds that the interests of justice do not require a dismissal with prejudice,'' Myers wrote in the new order.
His decision also means that there will not be any hearing — at least not now — on claims by defendants that the attorney general violated the state's Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation law.''
SLAPP, as it is known, is designed to prevent public officials from using the courts to punish and prevent speech on political issues. And Myers, in a preliminary ruling last year, said there was enough presented to him to believe that the indictment against the 11 electors and their allies appeared to attack what is "at least in part some arguably lawful speech.''
Several defendants told the judge that he should at least issue a final ruling on that, something that could make the case go away permanently. But Myers concluded that, with there currently being no active case, there is no basis for him to consider the claim.
There also is a separate — and so far unresolved — claim by Christina Bobb, one of Trump's former lawyers who is among those indicted, to have Mayes and her entire office disqualified based on claims that the case was prepared not by the Attorney General's Office but by an outside group.
The attorney general was forced into asking for dismissal after Myers threw out the original 2024 indictment. He ruled it was flawed because the grand jurors were not given all the information they needed to decide whether a crime had been committed.
The Supreme Court gave her only until June 19 to get a new indictment, a deadline her attorneys said they could not meet. So that left her with only two options: drop the case entirely or seek to have it dismissed — but with the option to refile.
There was no immediate comment from Mayes.
But former state Sen. Anthony Kern, one of the 11 who were indicted for signing the documents declaring they were the electors, questions whether the case ever will come back.
"We're not going to be dragged through it again because she has no case,'' he said.
"That's why she lied to begin with,'' Kern said, meaning the evidence that Myers ruled was withheld — Kern believes purposely — from the grand jury.
That refers to the federal Electoral Count Act of 1887, a statute that specifically addresses the possibility of competing electors from a state and how Congress must handle them.
And that goes to the heart of the defense: the claim by those indicted they were not trying to commit fraud but that they were preparing an "alternate slate'' of electors to send to Washington if it turned out that Trump actually got more votes in Arizona than Biden. And, at the time, there actually was pending litigation over the election results.
Attorney Jesse Franklin-Murdock, who represents state Sen. Jake Hoffman, another indicted elector, said Myers should have thrown out the entire case, with prejudice. And he referred to that preliminary finding by the judge that there was reason to believe that the case was brought because the defendants exercised "some arguably lawful speech.''
"Judge Myers already found that we met our burden of showing this case was brought in retaliation for Sen. Hoffman and other defendants' exercise of constitutional right, which is pretty damning for Attorney General Kris Mayes' office,'' he said. And that, said Franklin-Murdock, should have ended the case unless Mayes could prove otherwise.
"Rather than try to meet that burden, the attorney general stalled for well over a year and then dismissed the case to avoid her burden under the anti-SLAPP statute,'' he said. "We are evaluating all options.''
Even if Mayes resurrects the case, it may never get to trial.
Mayes, a Democrat, is up for reelection in November and faces off against Republican Senate President Warren Petersen. And Petersen previously told Capitol Media Services he would "drop it'' if elected.
"It clearly is a witch hunt,'' Petersen said. "I won't use my office to persecute my political enemies.''
If there is a new indictment, though, it will not include everyone charged the first time.
Loraine Pellegrino, one of the electors, pleaded guilty to a reduced charge.
And plea deals were made with Jim Lamon, another elector, and Jenna Ellis, who had been an attorney with the Trump 2020 campaign, with charges being dismissed in exchange for their cooperation in pursuing the other defendants.
Howard Fischer is a veteran journalist who has been reporting since 1970 and covering state politics and the Legislature since 1982. Follow him on X, formerly known as Twitter, Bluesky, and Threads at @azcapmedia or email azcapmedia@gmail.com.