Ariz. Supreme Court Issues Response to Kari Lake’s Second Election Petition


OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

The Arizona Supreme Court has handed down another decision regarding former GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake’s election complaint.

According to The Epoch Times, the state’s highest court has once again denied her request for an expedited review of her allegations regarding the manner in which the 2022 election was conducted in Maricopa County, Arizona’s largest.

Currently, her case is before the Court of Appeals, and on Friday, the Supreme Court decided to allow that lower court process to play out, writing, “as indicated by the Court of Appeals’ order setting an accelerated briefing schedule, the Court has no reason to doubt that the Court of Appeals appreciates Petitioner’s (Lake’s) desire for an expedited resolution.”

The high court also noted that it would again deny the petitioner’s request for transfer without prejudice “to seeking expedited review of an adverse decision after the Court of Appeals has had an adequate opportunity to consider the pleadings, conference the matter, and prepare a well-considered decision.”


In her latest petition, Lake wrote that, “in vacating the January 24 oral argument date on which this Court relied in part to deny Lake’s prior petition to transfer, however, the Court of Appeals opened the door to months of potential delay.”

The outlet noted further:

The court responded to that argument by saying the Court of Appeals entered an order on Jan. 9 and set up an expedited briefing schedule regarding her case with the next conference starting Feb. 1. Earlier reports indicated that the appeals court initially wanted to start in March.

A former broadcast journalist endorsed by former President Donald Trump, Lake filed a lawsuit in December against former Secretary of State and now-Gov. Katie Hobbs and several Maricopa County officials, asking the courts to either re-do the election in Maricopa or declare her the winner. Before she was sworn in earlier this month, Hobbs had defeated Lake by 17,000 votes.

Earlier, a lower court judge ruled that she had not presented any evidence warranting overturning the election’s results.

“Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson ruled against Lake’s challenge after finding the court was not presented with clear and convincing evidence in the widespread misconduct, she alleged influenced the election results,” Fox News reported. “Lake [then] filed an appeal with the Appeals Court on Judge Thompson’s ruling. She also filed a motion to send the appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking to skip a step with the Appeals Court. Arizona’s Supreme Court denied the request to transfer the appeal.”


In its decision, the Arizona Supreme Court said, “no good cause appears to transfer the matter to this court.”

Lake provided an update on Twitter: “My court case will be going before the Appeals Court prior to the Arizona Supreme Court because it’s already been scheduled for review. This decision was done without prejudice & I am confident the case will end up in their hands eventually. We’re moving forward.”

Lake has asked the Arizona Court of Appeals to reconsider all ten counts of a lawsuit that were tossed by previously by Thompson.


“Every one of Plaintiff’s witnesses — and for that matter, Defendants’ witnesses as well — was asked about any personal knowledge of both intentional misconduct and intentional misconduct directed to impact the 2022 General Election,” he wrote in his ruling. “Every single witness before the Court disclaimed any personal knowledge of such misconduct. The Court cannot accept speculation or conjecture in place of clear and convincing evidence.”


Over 200 people submitted statements to the court detailing their frustrating experiences trying to vote on Election Day in Maricopa County. However, Thompson stated that many of those voters were still able to cast their ballots.

“If the ballot definitions (sizes) were changed, it stands to reason that every ballot for that particular definition printed on every machine so affected would be printed incorrectly,” Thompson wrote.

He also said that Lake’s team did not provide evidence proving voters were turned away or refused ballots on Election Day.


Related Articles