The three-day trial on whether or not to dismiss charges against Republicans accused in Arizona of plotting the overturn of the results of a close presidential race for 2020 concluded Wednesday. Prosecutors insist their case isn’t politically motivated, after defendants claimed their alleged conduct was protected by the constitution as free speech.

What is the case?

Bruce Cohen, the Superior Court judge for Maricopa County, is evaluating requests to dismiss charges against at least 12 of the 18 people who were indicted by the Maricopa County District Court in April. The charges include fraud and conspiracy. The case involves 11 people who falsely submitted a document claiming that Donald Trump had defeated Joe Biden, as well as two former Trump advisers, five lawyers associated with Trump, and Rudy Giuliani.

Trump was not named in the indictment, but he was listed as a co-conspirator who was not indicted.

Biblical values or DEI values? Make no mistake. This election is a choice on what values America will embrace. Do we continue to embrace the Biblical values that were enshrined in the Constitution by America’s Founding Fathers, or will America embrace the Woke values of the Left? Support the Coalition for Jewish Values to restore our country back to its Biblical roots. 1776 Coalition Sponsored

Indictment: Giuliani allegedly pressured Maricopa County and state legislators into changing the election results, and encouraged Republican voters in the state to support Trump by mid-December 2020. Indictment: Giuliani made false claims about election fraud in Arizona. He also presided over an event in downtown Phoenix where he said officials had not attempted to verify the accuracy of the presidential election results.

Prosecutors claim the case was not political motivated

The prosecutor told the judge on Wednesday that the Arizona grand jury issued the indictments, and that the prosecution was not motivated by Republican animus.

Klingerman stated that the prosecution was nothing more than the enforcement of the law against those accused of frauds, forgeries, and conspiracies in order to alter the results of a legal election. They were unhappy with the results. Like all criminal prosecutions it seeks punishment for past behavior, to educate the public and to deter future attempts to do the same.

Klingerman said, “The state asked the grand juror to consider not indicting a greater number of Republicans than what the grand jury indicted.” “The state asked that the grand jury consider not indicting Donald Trump.”

After the hearing, Democratic Arizona attorney general Kris Mayes said that the motions of the defendants were an attempt to “divert from the facts in this case and confuse the public.”

Mayes stated, “Let me make it clear: The indictments filed in this case are not political in nature.”

Defense attorneys base their argument on the right to free speech

Defense attorneys claimed this week that Mayes used the indictment as a way to silence their client’s constitutionally protected speech regarding the 2020 elections and the actions taken to respond to the outcome.

They cited a law in Arizona that prohibits using legal actions to silence critics. Mayes was also accused of being biased against Trump supporters and a Trump supporter.

What law is being cited by the defense attorney?

The law, also known as the anti-SLAPP act, offered long-standing protection from civil suits before it was changed in 2022 to include people facing criminal charges.

The law states that individuals who are involved in legal actions involving the lawful exercising of constitutional rights such as speech can file a motion for dismissal. They must demonstrate that the legal action was “substantially” motivated by the “desire to discourage, retaliate or prevent the lawful exercising of a Constitutional right.”

According to a spokesperson from Mayes, the anti-SLAPP laws hasn’t been used in a criminal trial since 2022 when it was amended.

The prosecution argues that Arizona law is not applicable in this case. The judge asked Klingerman about the alleged illegal acts committed by the defendants on Wednesday.

Cohen stated, “I am very concerned about the differences between speech and actions.”

When will the judge rule on motions for dismissal?

Cohen said on Tuesday that he will rule separately on each motion – potentially at different times – but he did not specify when he’ll make the rulings.

Jenna Ellis was the former Trump campaign lawyer who worked closely alongside Giuliani. She signed a cooperating agreement with prosecutors, which led to her charges being dismissed. Republican activist Loraine Pellgrino was the first person convicted in Arizona when she pleaded guilt to a misdemeanor and received probation.

The remaining defendants have all pleaded guilty. Their trial will begin on Jan. 5, 2020.

Mark Meadows, the former chief of staff to President Trump, is trying to take his case to federal court where his attorneys say they’ll seek to dismiss it.