Dem
51
GOP
49
U.S. criminal law is heavily biased. In favor of defendants. The founding parents had a lot of experience with a king who just put anyone who opposed him in prison. To prevent even an elected president from pulling off that kind of stuff, rules were created to give defendants every possible chance to avoid a conviction. This includes challenging indictments nine ways to Sunday and many other (often frivolous) ways to try for Hail Mary plays or just stall until the prosecutors give up due to a heavy caseload. The only catch is that you need to keep paying your lawyers to make all these motions. Some lawyers charge $10,000 for all the research they need to do to write a brief that has at least some chance of convincing the judge. Consequently, this option tends to be available only to rich defendants, defendants with wealthy backers, or defendants who have lawyers who believe in their cause and work pro bono or at a reduced rate.
Today's example of this is the fake electors case in Arizona, where one of the people indicted is Rudy Giuliani, who is definitely not rich (anymore). Nevertheless, the group of indictees has filed a motion to throw out the case altogether on the basis of Arizona's anti-SLAPP law. Many states have similar laws. They were passed to allow judges to throw out obviously frivolous civil lawsuits, where somebody doesn't like something somebody else did, so he or she sues. If the judge thinks the whole case is garbage, he or she can just toss it right off the bat. And in 2022, the Arizona legislature expanded the law to allow judges to throw out vindictive or politically motivated criminal cases as well. The motion filed by Team Fake Electors is asking Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Bruce Cohen to throw out their entire case based on the expanded law.
Prosecutors working for Arizona AG Kris Mayes (D) are going to tell the judge that the motion is nonsense and they have a solid case that each of the indictees violated Arizona law. In all, 16 people have been indicted—not only the actual fake electors and Giuliani, but also Mark Meadows, Boris Epshteyn, Christina Bobb, and Jenna Ellis.
It will be tough for the defendants to make a strong case to the judge, since one of the fake electors has already pleaded guilty to the crimes and Ellis is cooperating with the prosecution. She undoubtedly is going to tell the judge in detail how the alleged crimes were committed and who did what and when. That is going to make it a lot harder for the indictees to show that there were no crimes committed. Nevertheless, the judge (mindful of potential appeals) has scheduled a hearing in which Mayes can present evidence of the crimes. With eyewitnesses who say: "I helped commit the crime" it is going to be tough for the defendants to make a case that no crimes were committed and this is all about politics. After he hears the evidence, he can kill the case or let it proceed on schedule, which means a trial in Jan. 2025. (V)