A Nevada courtroom got a little uncomfortable for prosecutors this week.
During a hearing Monday, Mary Kay Holthus, the district judge overseeing the so-called “fake electors” case, openly questioned whether the state can actually prove what matters most: intent to defraud.
And that matters. A lot.
Six Nevada Republicans were indicted in 2023 over paperwork sent after the 2020 election.
Prosecutors say the group tried to falsely award Nevada’s electoral votes to Donald Trump by signing and mailing certificates claiming to be the state’s legitimate electors.
One of those charged is Nevada GOP Chairman Michael McDonald.
But according to reporting from the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Judge Holthus wasn’t buying the idea that this rose to criminal fraud.
“At some point,” she said, “it’s only actionable if it’s an intent to defraud.”
She also pointed out that nobody signed anyone else’s name.
“It’s not a forgery, right?” Holthus asked. “Everybody signed their own names.”
That’s important, considering one of the main charges is forgery.
Defense attorneys said the Republicans were doing what people often do in close disputes: filing paperwork to protect their rights while the courts sort things out.
Attorney Maggie McLetchie told the judge there’s “no evidence” the defendants were trying to trick anyone or steal anything.
She said the certificate was simply a Republican Party document, not some secret scheme.
Holthus seemed to agree, at least in part.
“The way I see it,” she said, “it would be so impossible that I don’t see how there can be an intent to defraud.”
She added that nobody acted on the documents, and nothing changed because of them.
It’s like if you mailed a suggestion card to City Hall that says, “I think I should be mayor.”
Sure, you can send it. It doesn’t automatically make you mayor.
Chief Deputy Attorney General Alissa Engler pushed back, saying the issue of intent should go to a jury.
She argued the defendants mailed the certificates to required offices because they wanted them considered real.
But McDonald’s attorney, Richard Wright, summed up the defense side plainly: Where’s the proof they meant to deceive anyone?
After the hearing, Wright said the judge “identified the correct issues,” especially the missing intent.
Holthus did not rule immediately. The case continues, including a related matter in Carson City.
Conservatives see a dangerous trend here: using the justice system to punish political activity after the fact.
These Republicans didn’t hack voting machines. They didn’t alter ballots.
They signed their own names on party paperwork during a contested election and sent it through the mail.
That’s it.
Critics claim the effort was reckless and undermined trust. They say sending alternative certificates crossed a line and deserves consequences.
But to many, this looks a lot more like political hardball than criminal fraud.
And Judge Holthus’ comments gave that argument real weight.
If signing your own name to a document you agree with amounts to fraud, then half of America’s paperwork is criminal.
The opinions expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Nevada News & Views. Digital technology was used in the research, writing, and production of this article. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.
