Courts and 2020 Election Interference

A Colorado state appeals court has ordered a new sentencing hearing for former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, ruling that the nearly nine-year prison term she received in her 2020 election interference case was partly based on unconstitutional punishment of her protected speech about alleged election fraud. The court upheld all of Peters’ convictions—including attempting to influence a public servant, conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, first-degree official misconduct, violation of duty, and failure to comply with the secretary of state’s requirements—rejecting her claims of immunity. It also held that President Donald Trump’s purported pardon of Peters has no legal effect because the presidential pardon power applies only to federal offenses, not state crimes, and confirmed she is not shielded from prosecution. The panel found the trial judge properly criticized Peters’ self‑interested motives but crossed the line by explicitly penalizing her beliefs and statements about 2020 election fraud instead of focusing solely on her “deceitful actions” to obtain voting‑system data. The case is remanded for resentencing by the same judge, while Gov. Jared Polis has previously floated possible clemency, underscoring how election-denial cases are colliding with constitutional limits on both presidential power and judicial sentencing discretion.