‘You have literally, in my opinion, a crime that has occurred in another jurisdiction,’ the judge says.
A Nevada judge on Friday dismissed the alternate electors’ case against six Republicans who were alleged to have submitted fraudulent certificates to Congress in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
Clark County Judge Mary Kay Holthus issued a bench ruling on Friday during a hearing at the Clark County District Court that dismissed the case, according to courtroom reporters. The judge said she was not convinced by state prosecutors’ arguments that Clark County was the proper venue to hear the case, appearing to side with defense attorneys who said the signing of the certificates occurred in Douglas County.
“You have literally, in my opinion, a crime that has occurred in another jurisdiction,” Judge Holthus said at the hearing. “It’s so appropriately up north and so appropriately not here.”
In dismissing the case, the judge called off the trial, which had been scheduled for next January. The defendants included state GOP chairman Michael McDonald; national party committee member Jim DeGraffenreid; national and Douglas County committee member Shawn Meehan; and Eileen Rice, a party member from the Lake Tahoe area.
Each was charged with offering a false instrument for filing and uttering a forged instrument, felonies that carry penalties of up to five years in prison.
Defense attorneys contended that Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford improperly brought the case in Las Vegas instead of Carson City or Reno, which are cities located near where the alleged crime took place.
After the hearing, Mr. Ford told reporters at the court that “the judge got it wrong and we’ll be appealing immediately.” He did not provide any more details.
Margaret McLetchie, an attorney for one of the defendants, told news outlets that it’s unlikely the case will proceed. “They’re done,” she said.
She said that the attorney general would have to now bring the case to another grand jury in another venue such as Nevada’s capital city of Carson City, which would violate a three-year statute of limitations on filing charges that expired in December 2023.
