AZ Supreme Court to Hear Key 2022 Election Appeals from Lake, Hamadeh, and Finchem on Nov. 6

The Arizona Supreme Court is set to review the cases of three Republicans who lost their 2022 election attempts, with the conference scheduled for November 6, just after the upcoming elections.

Kari Lake, Abe Hamadeh, and Mark Finchem are among the candidates whose appeals have been pending. Lake, who ran for governor, Hamadeh, who sought the attorney general position, and Finchem, who aimed for secretary of state, are all key figures involved in the legal disputes stemming from their electoral defeats.

Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer clarified that the timing of the court’s review is not meant to undermine the candidates’ current campaigns. She emphasized that there was no intent to delay the decisions until after the November election and pointed out that any dissatisfaction with the timeline should fall on the challengers and their legal teams.

“They’re competent attorneys who understand the process,” Timmer stated, indicating that they had the option to expedite their cases if necessary but chose not to do so.

None of the candidates responded to requests for comments on the matter. However, a spokesperson for Hamadeh has accused the court of a sluggish approach, expressing frustration that the high-stakes nature of the disputes has not prompted quicker action.

Hamadeh’s case revolves around what he claims were inadequacies in the handling of evidence regarding electoral issues. After initially being denied extra time to gather evidence, his attempts to have a new trial were rebuffed by both the trial court and the Court of Appeals, which concluded that any discrepancies found did not materially affect the election outcome.

Lake’s appeals focus on what she describes as “new evidence” related to tabulator failures during the election, asserting that these issues disproportionately affected Republican voters and contributed to her loss to Democrat Katie Hobbs.

In contrast, Finchem’s concerns, associated with his unsuccessful bid for secretary of state, have less to do with the election’s outcome—having lost by over 120,000 votes—and more with whether he should be liable for legal fees incurred by his opponent after the court dismissed his claims.

The upcoming Supreme Court conference will address these cases along with others, but Timmer has noted that many cases pending for review have been waiting much longer for action than those related to the 2022 elections.

Timmer acknowledged the significant workload of court staff as a reason for the scheduling, reaffirming that there was no deliberate strategy behind the timing of the review. She expressed a willingness to have advanced these high-interest cases had she been aware of the potential implications on the candidates’ current electoral efforts.