In a significant legal development, a Michigan judge has dismissed all charges against 15 Republican alternate electors from the 2020 election, marking a pivotal moment in a case that has garnered national attention. Judge Kristin Simmins, appointed by Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmer, ruled that the prosecution failed to establish the requisite intent to defraud the government, a necessary component for the felony charges at issue.
The case unfolded in the wake of the contentious 2020 presidential election, where these electors were accused of submitting an alternate slate of votes for then-President Donald Trump in Michigan—a state where election results were hotly contested. The charges levied against them included forgery and conspiracy, carrying severe penalties up to life imprisonment.
During the proceedings, Judge Simmins emphasized that the charges were "specific intent crimes" and that the evidence presented did not show the electors acted with a fraudulent purpose. Instead, she observed that the defendants seemed to believe they were engaged in legitimate legal processes. This point was underscored by testimony from GOP elector James Renner, a former state trooper, who stated he would not have participated had he thought the meeting illegal.
The attorney general's case had been fraught with issues from the start. Attorney General Dana Nessel had been recorded acknowledging that holding the trial in Lansing, a Democratic stronghold, could sway the jury in her favor—a statement that critics have cited as indicative of political bias. Furthermore, Judge Simmins criticized Nessel for suggesting she had intentionally delayed the case, noting the logistical challenges inherent in managing a large group of defendants and extensive witness testimony.
In court, evidence that undermined the state's position came to light, such as the fact that the session at the Michigan GOP headquarters was not conducted in secret, with participants even allowing photos to be taken. Judge Simmins remarked on this openness, saying, "People who are committing a crime don’t pose for a photo—that would be weird."
The state’s lead investigator, Howard Shock, encountered difficulties under cross-examination, prompting visible frustration and disbelief from the judge. After considering all the evidence, Simmins concluded, "This is a fraud case, and I don’t believe there is enough evidence to prove it."
The ruling has broader implications, casting doubt on the attorney general’s approach to prosecuting political adversaries. Judge Simmins highlighted that the actions of the electors, including Meshawn Maddock, the former Michigan GOP co-chair, appeared to be a form of political protest rather than an attempt to unlawfully replace the certified Democratic slate.
The dismissal delivers a significant blow to Nessel, who had characterized the alternate electors' actions as criminal forgery. Conversely, it serves as a vindication for Republicans, who have long argued that the prosecution was an instance of politically motivated legal warfare against those who questioned the 2020 election results. With the case dismissed, attention now turns to the ramifications of this legal outcome on future electoral disputes and the conduct of political prosecutions.
