The Arizona Supreme Court just decided on Kari Lake’s appeal of her defeat in the Republican gubernatorial primary last year, which will undoubtedly have an impact on Arizona politics. For many years to come, electoral norms will probably be shaped by this choice.
The Arizona Supreme Court has declined to expedite a probe into alleged shady conduct in Maricopa County with reference to their 2022 election, despite a passionate request from a worried state citizen. It seems that justice might still be delayed despite her best efforts.
TRENDING: NEW Trump Diamond Bills Will Drive Liberals Crazy!
Her appeal is currently being heard by the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court decided on Friday to let that lower court procedure go, saying, “as indicated by the Court of Appeals’ order setting an accelerated briefing schedule, the Court has no reason to doubt that the Court of Appeals appreciates Petitioner’s (Lake’s) desire for an expedited resolution.”
The high court also noted that it would again deny the petitioner’s request for transfer without prejudice “to seeking expedited review of an adverse decision after the Court of Appeals has had an adequate opportunity to consider the pleadings, conference the matter, and prepare a well-considered decision.”
In her latest petition, Lake wrote that, “in vacating the January 24 oral argument date on which this Court relied in part to deny Lake’s prior petition to transfer, however, the Court of Appeals opened the door to months of potential delay.”
The outlet noted further:
The court responded to that argument by saying the Court of Appeals entered an order on Jan. 9 and set up an expedited briefing schedule regarding her case with the next conference starting Feb. 1. Earlier reports indicated that the appeals court initially wanted to start in March.
A former broadcast journalist endorsed by former President Donald Trump, Lake filed a lawsuit in December against former Secretary of State and now-Gov. Katie Hobbs and several Maricopa County officials, asking the courts to either re-do the election in Maricopa or declare her the winner. Before she was sworn in earlier this month, Hobbs had defeated Lake by 17,000 votes.
The election results were overturned by the judge despite an original court decision that was against her.
“Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson ruled against Lake’s challenge after finding the court was not presented with clear and convincing evidence in the widespread misconduct, she alleged influenced the election results,” Fox News reported. “Lake [then] filed an appeal with the Appeals Court on Judge Thompson’s ruling. She also filed a motion to send the appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking to skip a step with the Appeals Court. Arizona’s Supreme Court denied the request to transfer the appeal.”
In its decision, the Arizona Supreme Court said, “no good cause appears to transfer the matter to this court.”
Lake provided an update on Twitter: “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. We’re moving forward.”
Lake filed an appeal with the Arizona Court of Appeals in the hopes that a second opportunity might help her case, which Thompson had previously dismissed. She’s taking a courageous stance for justice and seeking to establish the validity of each of the ten charges!
“Every one of Plaintiff’s witnesses — and for that matter, Defendants’ witnesses as well — was asked about any personal knowledge of both intentional misconduct and intentional misconduct directed to impact the 2022 General Election,” he wrote in his ruling. “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.”
More than 200 residents of Maricopa County bravely revealed their terrifying accounts of trying to cast a ballot on Election Day, but in the end everyone was able to do so and have their opinions heard.
“If the ballot definitions (sizes) were changed, it stands to reason that every ballot for that particular definition printed on every machine so affected would be printed incorrectly,” Thompson wrote.
No evidence supporting Lake’s team’s allegations that voters weren’t given an opportunity to express their opinions on election day was discovered.
