Arizona fake electors are prominent Republican Party activists
The Briefing video news shows explores who was indicted in 2024 by an Arizona grand jury in an election fraud case for former President Donald Trump.
The Arizona Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that mandated three Republican officials, Mark Finchem, Anthony Kern, and Paul Gosar, to cover the legal expenses of former Democratic lawmaker Charlene Fernandez.Fernandez had sent a letter to federal law enforcement urging an investigation into the trio’s involvement in the January 6th Capitol riot, which led to a defamation lawsuit against her by the three Republicans.The initial trial court dismissed the defamation lawsuit, deeming it baseless, and granted Fernandez $75,000 in legal fees.
The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s order requiring three current and former Republican elected officials to pay the attorney’s fees of a former Democratic state lawmaker from a defamation lawsuit dismissed in 2022.
Former Rep. Charlene Fernandez, assistant minority leader in the Arizona House in 2021, signed a letter asking federal law enforcement officials to investigate Mark Finchem, Anthony Kern and U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar for their involvement in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. Finchem and Kern were state House representatives when Donald Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol. Finchem is now in the state Senate. The letter alleged they “through words and conduct aided and abetted sedition, treason or any other federal crimes.”
The three Republicans filed a defamation lawsuit against Fernandez, which the trial court dismissed, saying the claims were groundless.
The trial court found that Fernandez’s letter was protected by the constitutional guarantees to free speech and the right to petition the government. It also ruled that the men brought the lawsuit without substantial justification, awarding Fernandez $75,000 in attorney’s fees as a sanction.
The Court of Appeals upheld that award, but Finchem, Kern and Gosar subsequently petitioned the Arizona Supreme Court for review. The justices sent the case back to the appeals court for reconsideration in light of a May 2024 decision in Arizona Republican Party v. Richer, in which the justices reversed sanctions against the Arizona Republican Party in a 2020 election challenge. That decision clarified what constitutes bringing a case “without substantial justification.”
Under Arizona statute, a claim is “without substantial justification” if it is both “groundless and is not made in good faith,” according to the Court of Appeal’s decision, filed on Feb. 11. In its May 2024 decision, the Arizona Supreme Court said that “long shot” cases are not necessarily groundless. A “claim may lack winning merit without being sufficiently devoid of rational support to render it groundless,” the justices wrote.
Applying this precedent, the Court of Appeals wrote that a losing claim is not necessarily groundless if it is “fairly debatable,” as was the case with Finchem, Kern and Gosar’s lawsuit.
Although the men’s claim against Fernandez was ultimately without merit, the Court of Appeals wrote, “the level of examination required to determine that” meant the defamation claim was “fairly debatable” and therefore not groundless. Therefore, attorney’s fees as a sanction were not justified, the appeal court said.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=67ae0549ce284137ba43f5c98c7ed293&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fstory%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Flegislature%2F2025%2F02%2F13%2Farizona-court-reverses-sanctions-against-gosar-kern-finchem%2F78476668007%2F&c=1915305533170383744&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2025-02-13 00:19:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.
