Staff Reports
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes is finding out the hard way that politically motivated prosecutions can hit a snag, particularly when her targets rally around a law designed to protect free speech and whistleblowers. A recent court ruling has thrown a significant wrench in Mayes’ grand ambitions to prosecute a select group of Trump allies and alternate electors from the 2020 election. Instead of a swift conviction, the Attorney General is now grappling with the consequences of overreaching, fueled by a desire to settle political scores.
Mayes made headlines last year when she announced a grand jury indictment against former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, and a handful of other Trump aides. The charges ranged from conspiracy to felony forgery, complete with Trump labeled as an “unindicted co-conspirator.” There’s nothing quite like a headline that tries to conjure the drama of a courtroom thriller—except, in this case, the plotline seems to be flopping faster than Mayes’ campaign-winning margin, which was less than 300 votes.
NEW: Democrat AG Suffers Major Setback In Case Against Trump Allies, Alternate Electors. https://t.co/kwv7ANqRnx #DiamondandSilk
— Diamond and Silk® (@DiamondandSilk) February 18, 2025
A barrage of indictments piled onto eleven additional Arizona Republicans who served as alternate electors, a group that leftist prosecutors have labeled as “fake electors.” Where did the term “fake” even come from? The idea seems to have been dreamt up in the same place that invented the phrase “soda tax.” As court battles unfold in places like Michigan and Nevada, and even with Georgia’s Fani Willis working on a similarly controversial case, Mayes’ case looks like a sinking ship in a sea of questionable charges.
Recent developments have shown that the defendants are not about to roll over easily. Their argument pivots around Arizona’s anti-SLAPP law, initially designed to prevent frivolous lawsuits and protect against politically motivated actions. This law has been characterized as a rare gem of sanity coming from the Republican-controlled legislature, especially when it was expanded to cover criminal charges just last year. Judge Sam Myers of the Maricopa County Superior Court has indicated that the defendants’ motions are compelling enough to merit further consideration, a shadow of doubt now hanging over Mayes’ legal crusade.
As things stand, Mayes has 45 days to respond to this latest development, perhaps contemplating how to spin this setback into a political advantage. Her argument hinges on the notion that filing alternate slates of electors amounts to more than just political maneuvering—it’s the stuff of felonious conspiracy, according to her interpretation of the law. Ironically, the Attorney General’s desperate attempts to portray this as a blatant attack on the voters could end up backfiring spectacularly, adding more wood to a fire that is already flickering ominously for her case.
For now, the court proceedings highlight not only the absurdity of the charges but also the resilience of those targeted, making it clear that voters are not simply pawns in a political game. As the defendants fight back against what many see as a politically motivated witch hunt, the fate of Mayes’ case hangs in the balance, raising questions about the integrity of prosecutions that seem more about partisanship than justice.
