Arizona Prosecutors Refute Political Motive Claims in Fake Electors Case

A three-day hearing over the dismissal of charges against several Republicans accused of attempting to overturn the results of Arizona’s 2020 presidential election concluded Wednesday. Prosecutors emphasized that their case is strictly based on legal grounds, not political motivations, countering defense claims that the defendants’ conduct falls under constitutionally protected free speech.

The case is currently under review by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Bruce Cohen, who is considering motions from at least a dozen of the eighteen indicted individuals. The charges include fraud, conspiracy, and forgery, primarily targeting eleven people who submitted false documents declaring Donald Trump as the winner in Arizona. Among those indicted are two former aides to Trump and five attorneys associated with him, including Rudy Giuliani.

Although Trump has not been formally charged, he is identified as an unindicted co-conspirator in the indictment. Allegations detail that Giuliani pressured local officials and state lawmakers to alter the election results, encouraging Republican electors to cast votes for Trump in December 2020. He is also accused of promoting unfounded claims of election fraud in Arizona.

Prosecutor Nicholas Klingerman pointed out that the indictments originated from an Arizona grand jury, asserting that the prosecution is fair and devoid of bias against Republicans. “This prosecution involves nothing more than enforcing the law against those who are alleged to have committed frauds, forgeries and conspiracies,” he stated, underlining the need to maintain election integrity.

In response to the defense’s arguments, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes rejected claims of political motivations behind the indictments, asserting they were rooted in factual evidence. “The indictments in this case were not politically motivated,” she affirmed in a post-hearing statement.

Defense attorneys aimed to frame the indictment as an infringement on their clients’ free speech rights regarding the 2020 election. They referenced Arizona’s anti-SLAPP statute, which protects individuals from baseless legal actions intended to silence criticism. This law was revised in 2022 to also encompass certain criminal charges, although it has yet to be applied in a criminal context since its modification.

Judge Cohen expressed concern over the clear distinction between free speech and alleged criminal actions. He stated he would address each motion to dismiss individually but did not provide a timeline for his decisions.

Notably, former Trump campaign attorney Jenna Ellis has reached a cooperation agreement with prosecutors, leading to the dismissal of her charges. Republican activist Loraine Pellegrino has already pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge, becoming the first individual convicted in this ongoing case. The remaining defendants have pleaded not guilty, with their trial set to begin on January 5, 2026.

Former Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows has indicated plans to shift his case to federal court, where further motions for dismissal are expected.

Associated Press writer Gabriel Sandoval contributed to this report.