Republican Attorney General candidate Abe Hamadeh has taken his appeal for a new trial to the Arizona Supreme Court.
In the petition filed on Thursday, Hamadeh’s team argued that the state’s judicial branch had thus far failed to provide timely decisions in such a time-sensitive case. The trial court took 161 days to issue its order denying Hamadeh’s motion since the initial January filing, which included over 60 days for the judge to set oral argument, and another 60 days for the judge to issue his denial.
“Pointedly, the parties’ rights to speedy decisions have been grossly and repeatedly violated,” stated the petition. “Given the urgency to resolve all of these matters and the lack of a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy, a special action to this Court is warranted.”
Hamadeh declared that the public had the right to a full, unfettered review of the evidence. According to his petition, that amounts to “hundreds, if not thousands” of uncounted votes that would heavily weigh in his favor and, ultimately, determine him the rightful winner of this past election.
“Our justice system cannot tolerate the government withholding evidence,” tweeted Hamadeh. “Count the votes.”
🚨🚨BREAKING🚨🚨
We just filed a Special Action with the Arizona Supreme Court asking for a new trial regarding the November 2022 election.
Our justice system cannot tolerate the government withholding evidence. Count the votes. pic.twitter.com/hmqdq9lasE
This evidence, according to Thursday’s petition, indicates critical vote count discrepancies that undermine the integrity of the recount result’s 280-vote lead that declared Democratic opponent Kris Mayes the victor. This included the allegation that machine tabulators misread valid votes as undervotes.
Last month, the trial court rejected Hamadeh’s bid to further undertake the process and exploration of alleged vote count discrepancies uncovered through the recount.
Hamadeh filed a motion for a new trial in January based on alleged evidence of uncounted votes discovered through the recount process. In Thursday’s petition, Hamadeh counsel explained it wasn’t possible to obtain this evidence warranting a new trial until after the late-December evidentiary hearing.
“[T]he newly discovered evidence was information and data that government bodies not only failed to disclose but that they also wrongfully withheld,” stated the petition. “[S]tate and county officials used the power and purse of the government to take a substantive position in an election contest and to actively tip the scales of justice by withholding public records and concealing information that validated the vote count issues Petitioners raised at trial.”
The petition further argued that the trial court’s denial was due to a lack of procedural clarity in election contests, not lack of evidence.
“If elections in Arizona are to truly be free and equal, Arizonans must be assured that government bodies cannot use resource and information asymmetry to favor one candidate over another with impunity,” concluded the petition.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Republican attorney general challenger Abe Hamadeh has yet to receive a ruling, a month after Mohave County Superior Court Judge Lee Jantzen promised one. The delay aligns with the judge’s history of tardiness on issuing rulings.
Hamadeh argued for a new trial in mid-May. At the time, Jantzen said he had a specific date in mind to issue a ruling, which he didn’t disclose, but promised to issue a ruling in several weeks’ time. That would’ve meant a ruling at some point near the end of May, possibly early June. It’s nearly July now.
Jantzen has been disciplined twice for failing to issue rulings on time.
In 2018, Jantzen was censured for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct, after failing to rule on an individual’s petition for post-conviction relief for over two years. Over those two years, Jantzen falsely certified on multiple payroll statements that he had no matters under submission that were pending and undetermined for over 60 days.
At some point prior to that punishment, Jantzen received a warning from the Commission on Judicial Conduct for similar misconduct involving a delayed ruling.
In 2021, Jantzen was again publicly reprimanded for failing to issue a ruling within 30 days as promised. He ended up issuing the ruling after 79 days. During that time, Jantzen again signed a payroll certification falsely claiming that he had no tardy matters under submission pending and undetermined.
Hamadeh trails Attorney General Kris Mayes by 280 votes: a fraction of the original 511 vote lead Mayes had prior to the recount. During oral arguments for a new trial in May, Hamadeh argued for the favorable existence of hundreds of “lost” uncounted votes — or, undervotes — and provisional ballots.
Incompetent election officials and those who protect them have attacked democracy. pic.twitter.com/P1AXJWs1NB
There were over 9,000 provisional votes that weren’t included in the final count. About 70 percent of Election Day voters were in favor of Hamadeh. Based on that scale, Hamadeh could have more than enough votes to surpass Mayes.
Provisional vote totals took as long as they did to discover due to a delay in response from the counties, according to Hamadeh. The disjunctive information flow between the government and the public is one of the warranting factors for a new trial, per Hamadeh.
“We have to get information from 15 different government agencies, and it’s complicated,” said Hamadeh. “I wish we had access to the information that the government has. That’s why we’re asking for a new trial.”
Democracy requires ACCURACY and ACCOUNTABILITY.
The amount of discrepancies in the November 2022 election is unacceptable. There are still over 9,000 uncounted ballots. Count the votes. https://t.co/AZyJ6x9WQ9
During the oral arguments, Mayes’ team focused on the amount of time that has passed since last fall’s election and her swearing in. Hamadeh has dismissed that claim. He argues that the Arizona Constitution’s absolute statement that the candidate with the most votes wins the election trumps any statutory timelines set by legislatures.
Of note, Mayes’ counsel never staked the claim that Mayes obtained the most votes. Conversely, Hamadeh’s team took every opportunity to present samples of evidence of uncounted, existing votes. The merits of these claims went uncontested by Mayes’ team.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The state of our republic is the foremost concern for Abe Hamadeh. Arizona is in a position to define it, specifically based on the outcome of Hamadeh’s election challenge.
“The idea of America, whether we are a nation that is ruled and governed by ‘we the people’ is threatened,” said Hamadeh in an interview with AZ Free News. “It’s the idea that Americans have lost faith in the idea that our elections are fair and honest. Once you lose confidence in that, you lose confidence in other aspects of America — like the rule of law.”
Hamadeh said that the recently released Durham report epitomized these concerns. The Department of Justice’s 306-page findings on the weaponization of the federal government against former President Donald Trump shined a clear light on the current nature of government and media, and the vital importance of an honest judiciary to hold them accountable.
“I sit back, and in its plainest terms: it was an attempted coup on President Trump. How there’s no accountability for that, how Hillary can collude with Russia to create a fake dossier, and this is what Durham has reported. That’s frightening,” said Hamadeh. “I recognize the power of the media, and it’s something I never thought I had a good grasp on. I thought they were generally biased but trying to be factual. But now I’ve discovered that the fourth estate has been totally corrupted, and there’s nobody holding the government accountable. The only thing we’ve got left to hold it accountable is the independent judiciary, which has been threatened by the left.”
It’s his deep concern for the direction of our nation, starting with the state of our elections, that affords him the boundless energy to continue his challenge of the 2022 attorney general election. Hamadeh engaged in oral arguments last week to argue for a new trial, based on the evidence they’ve found of disenfranchised voters.
“I think it goes much deeper than me winning. I’m fighting because I’m fighting for the truth, the people’s voice, and their votes to be honored. I think that’s a noble cause. Whether we succeed or fail, the government’s incompetence, the media’s hypocrisy, and the truth. And the truth is I won,” said Hamadeh. “How can we survive as a country when we no longer have faith in our elections or rule of law? What is the government at this point?”
Mayes was declared the winner initially with a 511-vote lead. The recount slashed that lead to 280. Yet, there are thousands of provisional votes — over 9,000, an increase from the estimated 8,000 reported in April — that weren’t included in the final count. About 70 percent of Election Day voters were for Hamadeh. Hamadeh said these additional provisional votes took as long as they did to discover because of the delay in response from the counties.
“We have to get information from 15 different government agencies, and it’s complicated,” said Hamadeh. “I wish we had access to the information that the government has. That’s why we’re asking for a new trial.”
“Statutes don’t trump the Arizona Constitution.”
Arguments from his opponents — Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes — focused mainly on how much time has passed since the election, the recount, and Mayes taking office. Hamadeh said that didn’t matter, asserting that Hunt v. Campbell ruled that the Arizona Constitution made immutably clear that the person with the most votes is deemed the legitimate officeholder.
“Even with a recount provision, even with a statutory timeline, none of that trumps the Arizona Constitution. All that allows is a statutory tool to make a process to determine who has the most votes and who is the legitimate officeholder,” said Hamadeh.
Hunt v. Campbell concerned the last major election challenge in a close race: over 100 years ago, in the 1916 gubernatorial election. Mayes’ counsel argued that the precedent was inapplicable since the ruling came before statutory timelines for elections were established. However, the judge rebutted in closing that there was a recount provision in place at the time of the Hunt v. Campbell decision.
Of all that the attorney general’s counsel did argue, they never claimed that Mayes obtained the most votes. Hamadeh’s team presented evidence of existing votes not counted, claims which went uncontested by the opposition. When given their turn to speak, Maricopa County didn’t offer any arguments of their own.
Based on what he’d witnessed, Hamadeh said he didn’t believe Mayes’ team came prepared. He believed it evinced a troubling, baseless confidence that the case was over before it had even begun, speculating that the consistency of favorable media coverage played a role as well.
“I think they were trying to treat our case the same as that of Mark Finchem or Kari Lake, or some of these cases with a larger margin,” said Hamadeh. “When they control the media and the government, they feel really emboldened to – it’s almost this hubris where they don’t think this judge will do something.”
Before Hamadeh had the complete voter data handed over from the counties to argue his case fully, The Washington Post editorial board wrote in a post-New Year’s piece that his defeat symbolized an end to election denialism.
“It brings me a lot of joy when we keep discovering the truth.”
Hamadeh pointed out that the media has trotted out the phrase “count all the votes” on repeat since 2020 — which he says is exactly what his case is all about. I’m fighting for the truth. I’m actually scared that these people are running our government and controlling our media.
“The government hasn’t counted all legitimate ballots,” said Hamadeh. “The media always argues, you have to count every single vote. I intend to show their hypocrisy. I have a lot of fun. I’m basically doing what I said I was doing as attorney general, which is exposing corruption, incompetence, and hypocrisy for the truth. I’m enjoying it.”
Hamadeh shared that he asked a group of about 100 attendees at a recent Republican Federation for Women event how many of them knew of someone who had lost faith in their elections and would no longer vote because of what happened last November. According to Hamadeh, every single hand went up.
“It breaks my heart that they’ve lost faith and confidence, and their solution — it’s not a solution — is ‘why vote?’”
It is my greatest honor fighting for democracy, fighting for the voters of Arizona, fighting for the integrity of our elections, and fighting for the rule of law.
Hamadeh claims that the 280 margin isn’t that unreasonable to question considering the myriad hiccups throughout last year’s election season. Last October, Gov. Katie Hobbs in her former capacity as secretary of state revealed that there were 6,000 Arizonans mistakenly registered as federal-only voters.
“This is 280 votes, and the government has already admitted to making these big mistakes,” said Hamadeh. “Why would Katie Hobbs not have done the right thing by telling the court and us if they didn’t have anything to gain?”
Hobbs neglected to disclose the undervotes in the attorney general race until after the December hearing. She claimed that the Maricopa County Superior Court order to prevent disclosure of the recount results prevented her from disclosing the undervotes, but Hamadeh said that wasn’t the case.
“Their actions speak louder than anything I have to say,” said Hamadeh. “We were in court arguing about undervote issues, and they [Hobbs’ team] didn’t say anything. They should not be the ones that take a side in an election contest. They should be the ones doing their jobs as government officials.”
It’s telling that criticism is focused on ad hominem attacks — in fact, no one has argued that if the ballots are counted, @krismayes prevails.https://t.co/wz6Y06xpA4
“I wish Republicans had as much a desire to save the country as Democrats have in destroying it.”
Hamadeh said that losing this case would close the door to challenging elections in the future.
“If we don’t prevail, the idea that you can’t question elections and election officials and the government itself regarding elections, is going to only get worse,” said Hamadeh. “My family came from Syria. I know from their experience what it’s like to not live in a democracy, to not be able to question your government. That’s exactly what the media, ironically, and the Democrats are leading us to right now.”
Hamadeh characterized his fight as a natural extension of a uniquely American duty: to serve as a check and balance on the government by questioning it.
“It’s not only our right to question the government, it’s also our duty. Especially when there are this many errors, this much incompetence regarding our elections,” said Hamadeh. “I’m fighting because I think questioning our government is the foundation of what being an American is; if we lose that, we basically lose our country.”
After last week’s oral arguments concluded, Mayes issued a fundraising email asking for campaign and legal fund donations.
“With regard to the never-ending lawsuit… it was more ‘we think’ drama, without factual evidence,” wrote Mayes.
Hamadeh says he hasn’t issued any similar fundraising emails.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake must start her election challenge appeal at the Arizona Court of Appeals – Division 1, rejecting Lake’s argument for a transfer of the case in hopes of expedited handling.
The order declining Lake’s request to bypass a three-judge panel at the court of appeals in Phoenix noted “no good cause appears to transfer the matter to this court.” It also noted there had already been a scheduling order issued in case with possible oral argument slated for Jan.24.
It is a decision Lake appears to have accepted.
My court case will be going before the Appeals Court prior to the Arizona Supreme Court because it's already been scheduled for review.
This decision was done without prejudice & I am confident the case will end up in their hands eventually.
The defendants in Lake’s election challenge include the five members of the Maricopa County board of supervisors, the county’s two elections directors, and Recorder Stephen Richer. Katie Hobbs was also a defendant in her official capacity as Arizona Secretary of State at the time of the election.
The courts have now substituted Adrian Fontes as the defendant in his role as the new secretary of state, although Hobbs remains a defendant in her personal capacity as a contestee for governor.
Lake filed on Dec. 30 to have the Arizona Court of Appeals overturn the findings made by Judge Peter Thompson of the Maricopa County Superior Court, who denied Lake’s election challenge on Dec. 24 after a two-day trial.
Then, as reported by AZ Free News, Lake’s attorneys filed a petition the next day to transfer the appeal directly to the Arizona Supreme Court.
The three judges assigned to the panel that will hear Lake’s appeal are Maria Elena Cruz, Angela K. Paton, and Peter B. Swann.
Terri Jo Neff is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or send her news tips here.
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.
We are quite confident in both the legal and evidentiary merits of our case.
Particularly when all ten of our counts are given proper consideration.
We appreciate Judge Thompson's evaluation & are eager for a second (& more comprehensive) review of our case. https://t.co/JcAmHIZhks
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.
A few days ago I asked what conspiracy theory Kari Lake would offer for why she lost her election contest lawsuit. It is more insane than even I predicted. pic.twitter.com/8K6OIfSVcc
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.
Perkins Coie helped to create & disseminate the collusion hoax in a coup against the President of the United States
Hobbs hired them to help her undermine Arizona election law & procedure
And our ostensibly conservative Maricopa Attorney's office has agreed to help them do it?
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.”
Just like in Arizona, we are told that the certification process is purely ceremonial but also irreversible.
We are given results & told to accept them or be punished.
