The U.S. Supreme Court will likely decide soon whether to hear a case brought by Arizona Republican candidates Kari Lake And Mark Finchem challenging the use of machines to count votes.
The court added the duo’s case to its conference schedule on Friday, when the justices will discuss cases and vote on which ones to add to their agenda. The court’s decision was expected to be made public on Monday morning.
Legal experts studying the nation’s highest court have said the justices are unlikely to hear the case, in part because they agree to hear from only a small fraction of the thousands of appellate lawyers presented to them each year. Lake and Finchem have received some support, with the Arizona Republican Party recently filing a brief supporting their case.
It’s all here.
What do Lake and Finchem want?
After being rejected twice, by a federal judge in Arizona and an appeals court, Lake and Finchem took their case to the U.S. Supreme Court in mid-March.
Lake, who is running for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate, and Finchem, who is seeking a Senate seat, are challenging the use of electronic vote-counting machines, claiming the machines have been “covertly modified.” and have not been properly tested or certified for use, according to their lawsuit and attorney Kurt Olsen.
Their claims have not yet convinced several judges and have been refuted by state and county election officials.
But attorneys for Lake and Finchem say they have new evidence, at least some of which was obtained through public records requests and used unsuccessfully in Lake’s other lawsuits.
They rely on technical details from tabular logs and analysis by experts who may be familiar to Arizonans: Ben Cotton, founder of CyFIR, who was hired as part of the Senate’s much-criticized review of the 2020 presidential election, and that collected election data and associated data. server to a remote cabin in Montana; and Walter Daugherity, a Harvard-educated lecturer with ties to election conspiracy groups, including We the People AZ Alliance, and who told the Arizona Legislature about “projections” that Lake would defeat Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs in the Arizona election 2022.
What is the legal issue at hand?
Lake and Finchem are asking the nation’s highest court to determine that they have standing — a legal basis to bring the case — and allow their claims to be heard.
“Note that Lake and Finchem’s claims before the Supreme Court are not about overturning past elections,” Olsen wrote in an email. “Their claims here concern whether electronic voting systems in Arizona can provide a secure and reliable vote consistent with constitutional requirements.”
Still, they believe the U.S. Supreme Court should give them a “do-over” even if the election could produce the same winners.
Olsen and other attorneys working for Lake and Finchem were previously fined $122,000 for bringing the baseless case, and are being punished in Arizona for relying on false information in Lake’s case to claim her small loss Hobbs two years ago.
That election case is still pending before an Arizona appeals court, with oral arguments set for May 2 in Tucson.
Who did Lake and Finchem sue?
The government agencies that sued Lake and Finchem — the Pima County and Maricopa County supervisors and the Arizona secretary of state — all told the U.S. Supreme Court that they would not respond to the appeal unless the court ordered them to do so.
A deadline had previously been set on Wednesday for them to respond. A spokesperson for the Pima County Prosecutor’s Office said they could not comment.
Jeanine L’Ecuyer, spokesperson for the Maricopa County attorney’s office representing the board, said it was normal for parties to not respond at this stage of the case. The firm’s legal team would respond if the court requests it or if it hears the appeal, L’Ecuyer said.
JP Martin, spokesman for Foreign Minister Adrian Fontes, also said it was “standard legal protocol” not to respond. Martin said the appeal “reinforces a pattern of conduct by Lake and Finchem attorneys whereby the normal legal process is disrupted by filings that do not adhere to established guidelines that do not meet the court’s strict requirements.”
What has happened in the case since March?
Lake and Finchem’s attorneys argue that the judges should decide the case and do so quickly.
“The Court can and must accept the evidence supporting the urgency to expeditiously resolve this case,” they wrote. “If these issues are not corrected, the actual 2024 election results would become indeterminate.”
The court also received a letter from three outside groups urging it to take up the case: the Georgia Republican Party, the Arizona Republican Party and the Delaware Republican State Committee.
The parties asked the court to reverse the rulings of lower courts and send the matter back to judges to assess the “complaint on the merits to ensure that the violations of the 2022 Electoral Law are not repeated so that the elections of 2024 shall be held in accordance with Arizona law. .”
Reach reporter Stacey Barchenger at stacey.barchenger@arizonarepublic.com or 480-416-5669.
This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: How will SCOTUS handle Kari Lake and Mark Finchem’s voting machine lawsuit?
