Arizona Fake Electors Case Collapses Further as Arizona Supreme Court Denies AG Appeal, Forces Restart
A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled earlier that prosecutors improperly withheld key exculpatory information from the grand jury, including details about the Electoral Count Act of 1887.
Tommy Flynn
Phoenix, AZ – Arizona’s high-profile prosecution of 18 individuals accused of acting as alternate electors for Donald Trump in 2020 suffered a major setback on June 4, 2026, when the Arizona Supreme Court declined to review lower court rulings that had already crippled the case, leaving it in legal limbo and requiring a full restart before a new grand jury.
Democratic Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office originally secured indictments in April 2024 against 11 Arizona Republicans who signed a certificate claiming Trump won the state’s electoral votes, along with seven Trump associates including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, attorney John Eastman, and others. The charges included conspiracy, fraud, and forgery related to the alternate slate submitted to Congress.
A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled earlier that prosecutors improperly withheld key exculpatory information from the grand jury, including details about the Electoral Count Act of 1887, which governs electoral vote counting procedures and provided a potential legal defense for the defendants’ actions. An appeals court upheld that decision, prompting Mayes to seek intervention from the state Supreme Court.
In an unsigned order, the Arizona Supreme Court refused to take up the appeal, effectively affirming the lower courts’ findings of prosecutorial defects. Mayes’ office responded by stating it will present the entire case anew to a fresh grand jury rather than abandon the prosecution.
The case, one of the last major state-level efforts tied to 2020 election challenges, has faced repeated delays and procedural hurdles. Several defendants have already seen charges dropped through cooperation agreements, and the protracted litigation now risks extending well beyond the 2026 midterm elections, when Mayes faces re-election.
Defendants and Republican critics have long described the prosecution as politically motivated lawfare aimed at punishing Trump allies for contesting the 2020 results. The developments add to broader scrutiny of Mayes’ office, including allegations of improper coordination with left-leaning nonprofits in building the case.
This latest ruling underscores the fragility of the remaining charges and highlights ongoing challenges in sustaining high-profile post-2020 election cases amid procedural and political headwinds. The Attorney General’s office has not detailed a timeline for the new grand jury presentation.
Support Independent Conservative News
RWTNews is independent conservative news — no corporate backing, no agenda driven by advertisers. We rely entirely on readers like you to keep the lights on and the truth coming. If you've found value in what you read here, consider supporting us with a one-time or monthly contribution. Every dollar goes directly toward keeping this site running and growing.
Secured by Stripe. Your payment info is never stored on our servers.