The Court of Appeals granted Kari Lake an accelerated hearing to contest the outcomes of her state’s 2022 elections, giving Arizona Republicans a heartening win. With the court’s ruling, Ms. Lake has moved a step closer to her goal of perhaps annulling these hotly disputed elections and reviving confidence in democracy.
“The court case, initially scheduled for March this year, will be heard by judges on February 1, giving Hobbs—who’s already been sworn in as Arizona’s newly elected governor—until January 17 to write why Lake’s petition to the court should be rejected,” Newsweek reported.
TRENDING: NEW Trump Diamond Bills Will Drive Liberals Crazy!
The Lake War Room’s Twitter feed shared some important information on Friday.
“Our appeal is scheduled to be heard before the court on February 1st,” the account tweeted. “Do not underestimate @KariLake‘s desire to get justice for the people of Arizona. It doesn’t matter how long it takes.”
Kari Lake revealed further information via her own perspective after further research.
Take a look at what the Epoch Times said:
Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lakes’ legal complaint against the 2022 election process was given a prompt examination by the Arizona Court of Appeals, raising concerns about its legality.
The court ordered a reset of the Jan. 9 hearing in a short ruling that was released to the public the following day. “the matter for conference on February 1, 2023,” and endorsed Lake’s claims that her objection ought to be treated as a “special action petition.” According to reports, the court date was set for March.
The deadline for Gov. Hobbs’ answer to Lake’s petition on her legal challenge is scheduled for January 17th. The court earlier dismissed this case in December 2020 after two days of thorough deliberation.
Recent ruling by the Arizona Supreme Court, which rejected Lake’s request to have the case considered by the top court, concluded that the state’s Appeals Court will hear the election complaint.
On December 24, Maricopa County Judge Peter Thompson rejected Lake’s accusations about the election results and came to the conclusion that there wasn’t enough evidence to back them up. However, in an unforeseen change of events, he chose not to punish her financially severely for what she had done, enabling justice to be done without more harm. His conclusion came soon after his earlier ruling, in which he had completely rejected 8 of Lake’s 10 points.
