UPDATE, 4/19: "UPDATE: Fontes Asks Supreme Court To STRIKE Lake's Stretch To Get Final Word"
Secretary of State Adrian Fontes's attorneys are asking the Arizona Supreme Court to STRIKE Kari Lake's most recent effort to avoid having additional sanctions levied against her.
Last week, Arizona's Law covered Lake's filing, calling it "another unauthorized filing to support a not-allowed motion". Fontes is not asking the Justices to strike the entire "Motion to Reconsider"; instead, he is suggesting that the "Reply" is actually a thinly-veiled and disallowed "sur-reply" (aka reply to a reply) on the sanctions motions.
In its March 22 Order, the Supreme Court unanimously refused to accept Ms. Lake's Petition for Review of the dismissal of all but one of her election contest counts - the signature verification issue. In the same Order, they gave Lake a chance to file a Response to defendants' request for sanctions - and a chance for defendants to Reply. That was it.
The Supreme Court instructed the parties to explain why sanctions should not be granted for Lake's claims that more than 35,000 ballots were illegally injected into Maricopa County's election. The Justices said there was no support for those claims in the record.
Instead, Lake combined her sanctions Response with a motion to reconsider the denial, even though court rules prohibit such a motion. After the defendants' sanctions Replies referenced the reconsideration request, Lake submitted her reply-to-a-semi-response.
The Motion to Strike concludes: "This Court should strike Ms. Lake’s Sur-Reply and view it for what it is: the latest of several attempts to harass two duly elected officials and their constituents by improperly and unreasonably delaying and expanding these proceedings in order to very publicly perpetuate the unjustified delusion that Arizona’s elections are corrupt and cannot be trusted."
Original article, 4/13: " Lake Attorneys Dig Deep(er), Give Supreme Court Another Unauthorized Filing To Support Not-Allowed Motion (READ Reply)"
Maybe moreso than even political candidates, attorneys are known for always wanting to get the last word. Therefore, courts set up rules to prevent endless "yeah, buts".
|"No, I get the last word!"|
But, Kari Lake's attorneys are not just playing to the Justices in their already-decided Election Contest appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court. Which might explain why today they filed another "yeah, but" which is not permitted by court rules, to support their Motion for Reconsideration that is expressly prohibited by the Supreme Court's rules.
None of which can help their case as the Justices decide whether to sanction them for their earlier unsupported accusations about more than 35,000 ballots being illegally injected into Maricopa County's election last year.
Besides trying to take a fourth bite of the apple regarding their injected ballot theory, Lake claims today (below) that she did not violate Rule 22(f) that prohibits filing "a motion for reconsideration of... an order denying a petition for review" because she "did not request reconsideration of 'the *entire* election contest'". (I cannot throw Lake or her attorneys very far, but I could throw them farther than that Lake defense would fly.)
Recent relevant articles:
1) UPDATE: Kari Lake Acting Under "Undeniably False Pretenses" and Must Be Sanctioned, Fontes' & Hobbs' Attorneys Tell Supreme Court
2) TRIPLING DOWN: Don't Sanction Us Because Lake "Honestly Believes" There Were 35k+ Injected Ballots - Even If Not In the Record
3) AZ Supreme Court Sends Kari Lake Case Back To Trial Court To Look At Whether Maricopa County Followed Signature Verification Policies In 2022; Denies Review Of Rest Of Appeal
Post a Comment