Nevada judge dismisses 2020 fake electors forgery case

A Clark County judge has dismissed criminal charges against six Nevada Republicans who submitted an alternate elector certificate after the 2020 presidential election, ruling that prosecutors failed to show evidence of fraudulent intent. The decision follows similar outcomes in Arizona, Michigan and Georgia, where cases targeting alternate elector slates have collapsed amid questions about whether the filings crossed into provable crimes.

Judge Mary Kay Holthus issued the ruling Thursday, finding that the evidence presented by Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford did not support a reasonable inference that the defendants acted to defraud state or federal officials. The six individuals, including state Republican Party chair Michael McDonald and former Clark County GOP chair Jesse Law, signed documents asserting that Donald Trump had carried Nevada and gathered publicly outside the state legislature in December 2020 to execute the certificate. Holthus noted that the group made no effort to conceal its actions and that the certificate itself held no legal force under state or federal law, which further undermined claims of deceptive purpose.

The charges centered on allegations of forgery and offering a false instrument for filing. Ford brought the case in late 2023, describing the filing as an attempt to falsely claim Nevada’s electoral votes for Trump despite Joe Biden’s certified victory. The defendants pleaded not guilty and argued that their actions amounted to a public protest rather than a covert scheme. In her order, Holthus pointed to the open announcement of the certificate and the absence of any effort to induce government reliance on it as decisive factors against proving intent.

Ford’s office indicated it will appeal the dismissal. The attorney general, who is running for governor as a Democrat, has maintained that the case involves serious questions about the integrity of electoral processes. An earlier dismissal on venue grounds was reversed by the Nevada Supreme Court, returning the matter to Holthus for further review.

The Nevada ruling fits a pattern of setbacks for prosecutors pursuing alternate elector cases across multiple states. In Arizona, Attorney General Kris Mayes dismissed charges but signaled plans to seek a new indictment. Michigan and Georgia cases have also been dropped or significantly narrowed. These developments highlight the legal hurdles in establishing criminal liability for actions that, while politically charged, were conducted in full view and without immediate legal effect.

The 2020 alternate elector efforts emerged after Trump’s campaign and allies challenged results in several battleground states. Participants in Nevada framed their certificate as a contingency measure pending potential court or legislative action. Courts ultimately rejected related lawsuits, and Congress certified Biden’s win on January 6, 2021. The subsequent criminal cases tested whether such filings violated state laws on forgery or false records, with judges repeatedly citing gaps in proof of intent as a central obstacle.

Holthus’s decision also referenced the prosecution’s handling of exculpatory material, noting that certain evidence identified by the defense had not been fully presented to the grand jury. The ruling underscores the distinction courts have drawn between the political and legal dimensions of the 2020 challenges, where public statements and the non-binding nature of the documents played a recurring role in dismissals.

The case’s trajectory reflects ongoing tensions over accountability for post-election maneuvers and the standards required to prove criminal conduct in electoral disputes. With an appeal pending, the matter may return to higher courts for further consideration of how intent is established when participants act openly and without concealment.