Colorado Appeals Court Orders Tina Peters Resentenced, Says Trump Pardon Cannot Reach State Crimes
A Colorado appeals court ordered former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters resentenced and, in a 74‑page opinion, explicitly rejected President Trump’s claim that a federal pardon can reach state crimes, finding that her 2024 sentence improperly punished her for continuing to promote election‑fraud conspiracies protected by the First Amendment. Peters, who is serving a nine‑year term, plans to ask at resentencing for a sentence of time served (about 540 days) to secure her release, and Colorado Gov. Jared Polis praised the ruling for upholding free‑speech rights while denying the pardon claim.
📌 Key Facts
- A Colorado appeals court ordered former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters to be resentenced; the ruling was issued April 2, 2026.
- The court’s 74‑page opinion explicitly rejects the notion that President Trump can pardon her state crimes, reaffirming that presidential pardon power does not reach state offenses.
- The appeals panel held that Peters’ continued promotion of 2020 election conspiracies should not have been a factor in her 2024 sentence because using it as such violated her free‑speech rights and, since she is no longer a clerk, her speech cannot produce the same misconduct or future risk relied on at sentencing.
- The panel found that trial Judge Matthew Barrett improperly punished Peters for continuing to promote election‑fraud claims; Barrett had previously described her as a "charlatan" who "peddled snake oil."
- Peters is currently serving a nine‑year prison term; her attorney John Case said they will ask at resentencing for a sentence equal to time served (about 540 days), which would result in her release, and he characterized the ruling as affirming she was punished for "words" criticizing an insecure voting system.
- Colorado Gov. Jared Polis praised the ruling for rejecting Trump’s claimed pardon while upholding Peters’ free‑speech rights, calling the case a test of whether the system treats even people "we vehemently disagree with" fairly.
📊 Relevant Data
In Colorado, as of 2021, Black individuals make up 18% of the prison population while comprising only 4% of the adult population, resulting in an imprisonment rate approximately 7 times higher than that of White individuals, who make up 44% of prisoners and 70% of adults.
Colorado Public Welfare Final — Public Welfare Foundation
According to the Heritage Foundation's database, there has been only 1 proven instance of election fraud in Colorado between 2016 and 2026.
The Heritage Foundation's Election Fraud Map — The Heritage Foundation
All-mail voting in Colorado shows near-zero evidence of vulnerability to fraud, based on analyses of the modern era.
All-mail voting in Colorado increases turnout and reduces turnout disparities — PMC - National Center for Biotechnology Information
📰 Source Timeline (3)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
- PBS reports that the Colorado appeals court ruling ordering former Mesa County clerk Tina Peters’ resentencing came down 'today,' confirming timing.
- The segment highlights that the judges said her continued promotion of election conspiracies should not have been a factor in her 2024 sentencing because it violated her free‑speech rights.
- PBS notes that the court rejected President Trump’s attempt to pardon Peters, reaffirming that presidential pardon power does not extend to state crimes.
- Article provides additional detail that the appeals court’s opinion is 74 pages and explicitly rejects "the notion that Trump has authority to pardon her state crimes."
- Confirms Peters is currently serving a nine‑year prison term and that her counsel plans at resentencing to seek a sentence equal to time served (about 540 days), which would free her.
- Quotes Peters’ attorney John Case framing the ruling as affirming that she was punished for "words" criticizing what he calls an insecure and illegal voting system.
- Adds reaction from Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, who praises the ruling for rejecting Trump’s claimed pardon while upholding Peters’ free‑speech rights and calls the case a test of having a fair system for people "we vehemently disagree with."
- Reiterates trial Judge Matthew Barrett’s prior comments calling Peters a "charlatan" who "peddled snake oil" and notes the appeals panel held he improperly punished her for continuing to promote 2020 election‑fraud claims.
- Clarifies the court’s reasoning that, because Peters is no longer a clerk, her ongoing speech cannot lead to the same misconduct, undercutting any sentencing justification based on future risk of similar acts.