Michael McDonald speaks in Las Vegas

...

Rachel Dobkin

By Rachel Dobkin

Weekend Reporter

0

Share

Newsweek is a Trust Project member

See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.


A Nevada state judge on Friday moved to dismiss an election inference case against six allies of former President Donald Trump.

Clark County District Court Judge Mary Kay Holthus granted a motion to dismiss the case, ruling that the court lacked the jurisdiction to oversee it.

The Context

Last December, Nevada Attorney General Aaron D. Ford announced that six Republicans, commonly referred to as "fake electors," were indicted after they allegedly "falsely portrayed themselves as Nevada's presidential electors in the aftermath of the 2020 election."

Read More

Aileen Cannon Seems to Be ‘Getting Lost’ in Trump Case—Republican Ex-Judge3 min read

Aileen Cannon Seems to Be ‘Getting Lost’ in Trump Case—Republican Ex-Judge

Donald Trump Gets More Good News in Critical Swing States: Poll4 min read

Donald Trump Gets More Good News in Critical Swing States: Poll

Putin Just Put US Territory ‘Under Threat,’ Kremlin Ally Warns4 min read

Putin Just Put US Territory ‘Under Threat,’ Kremlin Ally Warns

In the wake of his loss to Joe Biden, Trump and his allies attempted to overturn the 2020 elections results through the court system and allegedly through illegal means as well. There are similar cases to Ford's that are pending in the battleground states of Arizona and Georgia. Last August, Trump was charged with allegedly conspiring to overturn the 2020 election results in Georgia. He has pleaded not guilty and claims the case is politically motivated.

Nevada GOP chairman Michael McDonald was named as a defendant in Ford's case, along with Clark County GOP chairman Jesse Law, Republican National Committee (RNC) member Jim DeGraffenreid, RNC and Douglas County GOP member Shawn Meehan, and Durward James Hindle III and Eileen Rice, who are both affiliated with Nevada GOP politics.

What We Know

The defense argued that the case was improperly brought in Las Vegas instead of Carson City or Reno, which are closer to where the alleged election interference took place.

According to court minutes obtained and posted to X, formerly Twitter, by Politico senior legal affairs reporter Kyle Cheney, the "Court noted everything took place up north and either of those jurisdictions would be the appropriate one. Court further noted it didn't think it had jurisdiction over the instant case."

Holthus granted the defense's motion to dismiss the case "and further, everything else was moot and trial date vacated," the court minutes said.

Michael McDonald speaks in Las Vegas

...

The Views

Ford's communications director John Sadler told Newsweek via email on Friday, "We disagree with the judge's decision and will be appealing immediately."

Meanwhile, Trump supporters celebrated the case's dismissal on social media.

Ryan Fournier, co-founder and chair of Students for Trump, wrote on X on Friday, "The Nevada Fake Electors case just got DROPPED! Justice prevailed!"

Sigal Chattah, Nevada RNC committeewoman, posted to X: "Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford said the 'state got it wrong' and that his office will appeal the ruling to the state Supreme Court. Well we knew the STATE got it wrong but THE COURT got it right."

What's Next?

While Ford vows to appeal the case to the Nevada Supreme Court, Margaret McLetchie, Law's attorney, said on Friday, "They're done," according to the Associate Press.

The defense says that bringing the case in another jurisdiction would violate a three-year statute of limitations that expired in December 2023, the AP reported.

When asked about the defense's statement, Sadler told Newsweek: "We are focused on our appeal, and will continue to seek to hold the defendants accountable for their actions to sow distrust in our democracy. Appealing today's decision is not the only legal strategy available to our office, and as such we cannot discount refiling. Beyond this, we have no further comment."

Update 6/21/24, 4:46 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information.

Update 6/21/24, 5:20 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information.

Update 6/21/24, 5:55 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional comment from Sadler.

View 0 Comments

Request Reprint & Licensing

Submit Correction

View Editorial & AI Guidelines