The judge overseeing Nevada’s high-profile “fake electors” case expressed skepticism Monday about whether the six Republicans charged in the matter actually intended to defraud officials.
The defendants remain accused of signing Electoral College certificates falsely claiming that Donald Trump had won Nevada in the 2020 election, despite verified results showing Joe Biden’s victory. Prosecutors argue that the effort was part of a coordinated scheme to deceive officials.
Defense attorneys, however, maintain their clients were exercising free speech rights. “The state’s case fails because there’s no evidence that defendants were doing anything other than exercising their First Amendment rights to preserve their future rights to petition the government,” said Maggie McLetchie, representing Jesse Law, one of the accused electors.
The controversy stems from the post-election period, when Trump’s campaign requested electors in several swing states to sign certificates claiming a Trump win. The certificates remained unfiled with the National Archives, lacked the state seal, and the Secretary of State’s office returned the documents.
Despite these flaws, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford contends the electors intended to deceive officials by mailing the certificates to multiple locations, including Congress. Nevada has no statute criminalizing the use of false Electoral College certificates, so Ford charged the electors with filing false instruments and passing off documents as authentic.
Judge Mary Kay Holthus questioned whether the defendants’ actions could constitute fraud, noting it seemed unlikely anyone would act on the fake certificates.
The next hearing is on April 10.
The Old Blog in the Desert 
Leave a comment