In brief
Tina Peters, a former Colorado elections clerk convicted for her role in a data breach scheme tied to unfounded allegations of voting fraud, has requested the state appeals court to acknowledge Donald Trump's pardon and release her from prison. Peters' legal team argues that Trump's pardon should extend to her state-level convictions, invoking historical precedents, though state officials maintain that such a pardon cannot apply to state crimes. The court is set to hear arguments regarding her appeal on January 14.
DENVER (AP) — Former Colorado elections clerk Tina Peters is asking the state appeals court to recognize President Donald Trump’s pardon of her state convictions as valid.
In a motion Tuesday, Peters’ lawyers argued that the Colorado appeals court no longer has jurisdiction over her case due to a pardon issued by Trump on December 5. They further requested the court to release her from prison based on this pardon.
Peters, who previously served as the Mesa County clerk, was convicted of state crimes related to orchestrating a data breach linked to unfounded claims of voting fraud during the 2020 presidential election. Notably, Trump's pardon powers traditionally do not extend to state crimes.
Her legal team has cited historical precedents, including President George Washington's pardons during the Whiskey Rebellion, and is urging the appeals court to act promptly. The court plans to hear arguments from legal representatives regarding Peters' conviction on January 14.
In response, the appeals court permitted state attorney general lawyers to counter Peters’ claims by January 8.
The office of Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser did not comment on the case, but previously refuted the validity of such a presidential pardon.
If the court deems the pardon invalid, Peters may potentially escalate the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court while her state appeal continues.
Earlier, Peters lost a separate attempt in federal court to secure her release as her state appeal was being considered.
Peters argues she was punished for exercising her First Amendment rights by freely voicing concerns over election fraud. During her sentencing, the judge condemned her actions as a threat to the community and integrity of the electoral process.
Peters was convicted for permitting an individual to misuse a security card to access the election system and for being deceptive regarding this person’s identity, linked to Mike Lindell, a proponent of false election manipulation claims.
