by Corinne Murdock | Dec 28, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
The Maricopa County Superior Court denied most of the $696,000 sanctions requested against Kari Lake. Judge Peter Thompson clarified that Lake’s claims of election misconduct or fraud weren’t groundless or brought in bad faith.
“There is no doubt that each side believes firmly in its position with great conviction. The fact that Plaintiff failed to meet the burden of clear and convincing evidence required for each element of A.R.S. § 16-672 does not equate to a finding that her claims were, or were not, groundless and presented in bad faith,” wrote Thompson.
However, Thompson didn’t deny all of the sanctions. He did award Katie Hobbs $5,900 in her capacity as secretary of state for an expert witness, $22,400 in her capacity as governor-elect for another expert witness, and another $4,700 in her capacity as governor-elect for 8 hours’ worth of ballot inspections. The total of over $33,000 comes with an annual interest rate of 7.5 percent.
Lake’s “War Room” team declared Thompson’s dismissal a win. They reaffirmed that they would appeal his ruling on the case.
Lake’s lawyers petitioned late Monday to have Maricopa County and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs’ collective $696,000 sanctions request dismissed entirely.
In their court filing, Lake’s attorneys said that the county’s sanctions request was a punishment for litigating the election. The attorneys stated that they presented over two hundred witnesses that testified to facts and alleged violations of law, which included specific numbers of allegedly illegal votes exceeding the 17,100 margin between Lake and Hobbs.
“[T]he issues raised before this Court were of significant concern to millions of Arizona voters as to the causes of chaos that arose on Election Day — and the administration of elections in Maricopa County generally — and Plaintiff’s claims deserved to be brought and heard,” stated Lake’s attorneys. “Trust in the election process is not furthered by punishing those who bring legitimate claims as Plaintiff did here.”
Lake’s attorneys further disputed Maricopa County’s claim that there wasn’t any evidence of intentional misconduct to change the election outcome. They cited the court’s acknowledgement in its ruling that evidence did exist — though Thompson determined that the evidence didn’t appear to affect the election outcome.
The attorneys also rehashed testimonies from Election Day Director Scott Jarrett and County Recorder Stephen Richer. They claimed that Jarrett walked back his initial denial of knowledge of 19-inch ballots being printed onto 20-inch paper, something that would render them unreadable by tabulators. They also claimed that Richer offered conflicting testimony concerning chain of custody: he at first stated that ballots were processed at the Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center (MCTEC) before being counted at Runbeck, then later stated that ballots were counted at MCTEC and documented on chain of custody forms before being transferred to Runbeck for counting again.
The bulk of the sanctions fees came from the law firms tied to Democrat’s go-to litigator and principal Russiagate player, Marc Elias, who served Hobbs in her capacity as governor-elect. Hobbs requested over $457,000 for Elias’ law firm, Elias Law Group, and over $93,000 for Elias’ former firm, Perkins Coie. The two firms also requested nearly $56,700 for 16 hours of work. The firms noted that these definite fees for less than a day’s work don’t require a detailed review of invoices nor would they be subject to revision. In his denial of these sanctions, Thompson noted that itemization of costs were required pursuant to state law.
The firms also requested over $22,400 in definite fees for their expert witness, Kenneth Mayer, and nearly $4,700 for 8 hours of ballot inspections.
Lake claimed in a since-deleted tweet that Elias helped ghostwrite Judge Thompson’s ruling.
Maricopa County cited this claim as a justification for their sanctions request. In their counter to the sanctions request, Lake’s attorneys declared that her speech was constitutionally protected.
In her capacity as secretary of state, Hobbs requested nearly $37,000 for the services of Coppersmith Brockelman, a go-to law firm for Democrats whose partner, Roopali Desai, was appointed earlier this year to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Maricopa County requested an incomplete portion to cover attorney’s fees: just over $25,000. Over $18,700 would go to the county attorney’s office, and just over $6,300 would go to outside counsel with the Burgess Law Group. The remainder of the fees are pending. The county noted that only their clerical workers could export time from their time-keeping systems into a spreadsheet, and that they weren’t willing to require their support staff to work on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day.
The Maricopa County Superior Court dismissed Lake’s lawsuit on Christmas Eve. Judge Thompson asserted that Lake’s team didn’t provide clear and convincing evidence of election misconduct or fraud. Lake promptly announced that she would appeal the ruling.
In their sanctions request, Maricopa County declared that Lake engaged in “unfounded attacks on elections” and brought forth “unwarranted accusations against elections officials.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Dec 28, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
On Tuesday, Arizona succeeded in its effort to continue Title 42, a Trump-era activation of the policy enabling the rapid expulsion of illegal immigrants.
The Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on Tuesday blocked the D.C. District Court ruling last month ordering the Biden administration to lift Title 42 by Dec. 21. The policy will remain in place pending a hearing before the court on the question of whether states, including Arizona, may intervene to challenge the district court’s order.
Judge Emmet Sullivan, a Bush appointee, asserted that Trump’s initial implementation of Title 42 was unlawful. Although the Biden administration benefitted from the ruling, they appealed on Sullivan’s judgment of Trump’s use of Title 42.
Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who championed legal efforts to continue Title 42, said in a press release that this decision would ensure Americans’ safety where the Biden administration wouldn’t. Brnovich noted that Title 42 under the Biden and Trump administrations resulted in the expulsion of over 2.4 million immigrants.
“It’s disappointing [that] the Biden administration is willing to sacrifice the safety of American families for political purposes,” said Brnovich.
READ THE SCOTUS ORDER HERE
SCOTUS will fast-track the case for oral argument during its February session (Feb. 21 to March 1). Arizona and 18 other states petitioned SCOTUS last Monday to keep Title 42 in place, after the D.C. District Court denied their intervention.
One conservative-leaning justice, Neil Gorsuch, joined the liberal court’s opposition. Gorsuch wrote in his dissent, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, that Title 42 should be done away with since the border crisis doesn’t quality as a “COVID crisis.” Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan also opposed the order, but didn’t join in Gorsuch’s dissent.
“[T]he emergency on which those orders were premised has long since lapsed,” wrote Gorsuch. “[The states] do not seriously dispute that the public-health justification undergirding the Title 42 orders has lapsed.”
Gorsuch rejected Arizona and the other states’ arguments that Title 42 should remain untouched since it was their only means of securing the border. He clarified that he found the states’ concerns about the border crisis valid, but repeated that Title 42 was meant only to curtail communicable diseases, not the other issues stemming from an unsecured border.
“[C]ourts should not be in the business of perpetuating administrative edicts designed for one emergency only because elected officials have failed to address a different emergency. We are a court of law, not policymakers of last resort,” wrote Gorsuch.
READ THE DISSENT HERE
Title 42 of the Public Health Services Act has existed since 1944. The policy enables the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention the power to block illegal immigration into the U.S. to protect Americans from contagious diseases. This policy even applies to asylum seekers. Former President Donald Trump utilized the policy at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A federal judge blocked the Biden administration from lifting Title 42 in May. However, requirements to keep the policy in place have curbed the border crisis little, with reports revealing that the Biden administration covertly subverts the policy regardless of court orders and public promises earlier this year.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Terri Jo Neff | Dec 27, 2022 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
When video went viral this month of a Florida police officer needing three doses of Narcan after losing consciousness when exposed to fentanyl during a routine traffic stop, it renewed attention to the dangers the deadly drug poses to public safety and healthcare workers.
But protocols for handling fentanyl and other potentially toxic evidence are months from approved within Arizona’s judicial system, even though there are currently hundreds of ongoing fentanyl-related criminal cases in the state’s courts.
Court administrators and presiding judges across Arizona have expressed concerns about safety protocols since 2020 when the number of prosecutions involving the drug started to rise. But it was not until this June that Chief Justice Robert Brutinel of the Arizona Supreme Court established a taskforce to create guidelines for handling fentanyl and other toxic evidence in courthouses.
The Fentanyl and Toxic Evidence Taskforce was given a Dec. 31 deadline to file its report and recommendations. However, the 11 members of the taskforce notified Brutinel in November that they need more time.
As a result, the report’s deadline has been extended to March 31, 2023.
Guidelines are necessary, Brutinel noted in June, due to the “significant rise” of overdoses associated with fentanyl, as well as the corresponding rise in the number of cases in which fentanyl is part of the evidence against a defendant.
“Accordingly, there is the potential risk that the drug evidence and other toxic evidence in these cases will need to be handled in the courthouse,” the chief justice noted, adding that protocols for dealing with fentanyl exposure and for handling the drug is already developed for some industries. “There has been little guidance, however, issued for court personnel who may have to handle packaged evidence of fentanyl, carfentanil, their analogs, or other toxic evidence.”
The chief justice ordered the 2019 National Judicial Opioid Task Force guidelines be used by the taskforce as a reference to address several issues:
- Whether such drugs should be inspected and approved by designated court personnel before being allowed into a courthouse
- Whether these packaged drugs must always remain in the possession of law enforcement personnel, except by approval of the court
- Whether the drugs should ever be handled by court personnel or others during a judicial proceeding, such as attorneys, witnesses, court clerks, and jurors
- Whether such drugs should remain in a courthouse or court-related facility during non-business hours
- What safety policies should be established for the handling of fentanyl evidence
- Whether courthouse personnel should be trained to address possible exposure to fentanyl and other toxic evidence and to properly identify opioid toxicity
- Whether Naloxone (Narcan) should be kept in courthouses and other court-related facilities for emergencies and whether any court personnel should be trained in its administration.
One consideration for the taskforce is the need to balance safety concerns for court personnel and members of the public who may be exposed to the drugs during a judicial proceeding against the rights of defendants or even a victim in judicial proceedings to due process and a fair trial, Brutinel noted.
Terri Jo Neff is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or send her news tips here.
by Corinne Murdock | Dec 27, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Under President Joe Biden, November’s border encounters marked another historic high. This also marks the sixth consecutive month of an increase in border encounters.
There were over 233,700 border encounters, of which over 204,100 (87 percent) were unique. Cuban and Nicaraguan migrants made up the excess: over 68,000 (35 percent) of unique encounters were from the two countries. Mexicans and North Central Americans accounted for over 58,500 (30 percent) of unique encounters, a 14 percent decrease from November 2021.
The all-time high in one single month under the Biden administration occurred in May with over 241,100 encounters.
That’s a four percent increase from last month.
Since Biden took office, there have been over 4.36 million border encounters. This excludes “gotaways.” At this rate, there could be over 9.3 million encounters by the end of Biden’s first term.
Single adults accounted for 67 percent (157,200) of this month’s encounters. This demographic yielded the greatest growth year-over-year under the Biden administration. These latest totals for single adult illegal immigrants is nearly equal to the entirety of single adult encounters for fiscal year 2020.
Unaccompanied minors accounted for five percent (13,100). Family units accounted for 27 percent (63,100); this total is greater than the entire 2020 fiscal year.
The Tucson and Yuma Sectors recorded over 3,100 drug seizures for November. That’s a high under the Biden administration, but a low compared to pre-pandemic numbers under the Trump administration.
It’s likely more record highs are on the horizon. According to Fox News correspondence with Customs and Border Protection (CBP), 87 percent of illegal immigrants encountered over Christmas weekend were released. Of the nearly 16,500 encounters, only about 2,100 were expelled under Title 42.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Dec 26, 2022 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Kari Lake plans to appeal her lawsuit against governor-elect Katie Hobbs in her capacity as secretary of state and Maricopa County.
Maricopa County Superior Court declared in a ruling issued on Christmas Eve that Hobbs was governor-elect because Lake presented no “clear and convincing evidence” of election misconduct or fraud.
“[Election workers performed] their role with integrity. Not perfectly, as no system on this earth is perfect, but more than sufficient to comply with the law and conduct a valid election,” wrote Thompson.
On Monday, Maricopa County sought sanctions against Lake and her attorneys, Brian Blehm and Kurt Olsen. The trio could owe up to $696,000 to cover attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by the county and secretary of state’s office. The county asserted that Lake kept up a “sustained attack on Arizona’s elections” long before this recent election, and filed her lawsuit in bad faith.
The county cited a since-deleted tweet from Lake, which shared a report compiling claims from “legal experts” that Judge Peter Thompson’s ruling was “ghostwritten” by the likes of top Democratic election attorney and principal Russiagate figure Marc Elias and others.
Lake would be far from the first facing sanctions for disputing an election in recent years. There are at least three other parties with outstanding sanctions.
READ MARICOPA COUNTY’S SANCTIONS REQUEST HERE
Prominent among Lake’s claims of election malfeasance were missing chain of custody documentation for Election Day ballots in violation of the Election Procedures Manual (EPM) and inducing Ballot On Demand (BOD) printer issues by using 19” instead of 20” ballots.
Thompson preceded his 10-page court ruling by acknowledging voters’ “anger and frustration” over the “inconvenience and confusion” at vote centers, but issued a reminder that his duty was to weigh Lake’s claims and the actions of Maricopa County and the state against the law.
“[T]his Court’s duty is not solely to incline an ear to public outcry,” wrote Thompson.
In order to prevail, Lake needed to prove that alleged misconduct such as EPM violations and BOD irregularities were intentional, conducted by an officer making or participating in a canvass, intended to change the election outcome, and resulted in a change in the election outcome.
The ruling reviewed the testimonies of Lake’s witnesses: Mark Sonnenklar, a Republican National Committee election attorney; Heather Honey, a supply chain auditor and consultant; Clay Parikh, a Northrup Grumman cybersecurity expert; David Betencourt, a temporary technical election support employee (“T-Tech”) with Maricopa County; and Richard Baris, director of Big Data Poll.
With the exception of Honey, Thompson determined that these witnesses completely failed to relay personal knowledge of intentional or unintentional election misconduct. Honey testified that Runbeck Election Services employees introduced about 50 ballots of family members into the stream.
However, Thompson determined that Honey’s claims were insufficient to meet the burden of proof because these ballots weren’t clear and convincing evidence of affecting the election outcome. Thompson noted that Maricopa County in its testimony clarified that it only granted Runbeck permission to submit general public ballots, not those family member ballots.
“Every single witness before the Court disclaimed any personal knowledge of such misconduct. The Court cannot accept speculation or conjecture in place of clear and convincing evidence,” wrote Thompson.
Thompson declared further that Lake didn’t offer sufficient evidence to contradict the testimonies of Election Day director Scott Jarrett or County Recorder Stephen Richer.
READ THE CHRISTMAS EVE RULING HERE
In response to the ruling, Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chair Bill Gates declared that Lake sought media attention, not a remedy to the election.
“Plaintiff Lake’s lawsuit was never about well-pled facts and evidence. Instead, it was the continuation of a made-for-TV tirade from a candidate who cannot or will not accept the fact that she lost,” said Gates. “Arizona courts have made it clear that frivolous political theater meant to undermine elections will not be tolerated.”
During a Turning Point USA event earlier this month, Lake pledged to take this case “all the way to the Supreme Court.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Terri Jo Neff | Dec 26, 2022 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
As if there are not already enough scams making the rounds, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is reporting that scammers are impersonating the Social Security Administration (SSA) in an effort to get SSA recipients to disclose private information that can be used to defraud the victims.
And the holidays are a good time for families to talk with elderly relatives about the risks, according to AARP’s Legal Counsel for the Elderly.
One thing that makes it difficult for family members or caregivers to learn an elderly person has been contacted by, or even fallen victim to, a scammer is that the victims “come from a generation typically raised to be private and taught to be kind and polite,” according to Amy Nofziger of the AARP Fraud Watch Network.
“They feel compelled to answer the doorbell, provide information when an authority figure requests it and feel uncomfortable hanging up on someone,” Nofziger says.
Scammers are using the names of actual SSA employees to send recipients what appears to be an official letter. The letter invites the recipients to call a toll-free number to activate an increase in their SSA benefits, including claiming a cost-of-living adjustment.
Other targets of the scam have reported receiving an email or text message with a “click here” link to learn more about available SSA benefits. But what the scammers really want is to obtain a recipient’s personal information such as SSN, date of birth, or banking information which can then be used for illegal purposes.
Behavior often engaged in by SSA scammers includes:
- Threatens to suspend your Social Security number
- Warns of impending arrest or litigation
- Pressures you to confirm or provide personal information
- Promises to increase your SSA benefits for a fee
- Demands immediate payment
- Insists on secrecy
- Threatens to seize your bank account or investments
- Says you must decide immediately
Anyone who receives a suspicious call, text message, email, or letter can contact AARP’s Fraud Watch at 877-908-3360. Additional information on how to protect against scams is available here.
Meanwhile, contact your local law enforcement agency if you or someone you know already fell victim to a scam by revealing personal information or you were tricked into making a payment for an unreceived service.
Terri Jo Neff is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or send her news tips here.
