Michigan Attorney General Declines Appeal In False Electors Case; 110-Page Report Places Blame On Trump

Michigan AG Dana Nessel will not appeal the dismissal of charges against 2020 false electors, citing the conspiracy was led by Donald Trump.

By: AXL Media

Published: Mar 10, 2026, 10:02 AM EDT

Source: The information in this article was sourced from Raw Story / Votebeat

Nessel Concludes Prosecution Of Republican Elector Nominees

The long-running legal effort to prosecute Michigan residents who attempted to certify a slate of electors for Donald Trump in 2020 has come to an end. Attorney General Dana Nessel confirmed Monday that she would not challenge a lower court's decision to drop all charges against the remaining 15 defendants. The group, which included Shelby Township Clerk Stan Grot and former Michigan GOP co-chair Meshawn Maddock, had been facing multiple felony counts, primarily related to forgery. Nessel’s decision follows a September ruling by Judge Kristen Simmons of the 54-A District Court, who found that prosecutors had failed to provide sufficient evidence of criminal intent.

Sweeping Report Categorizes 2020 Efforts As 'Trump’s Conspiracy'

While Nessel is moving to close the case, she released an unusually detailed 110-page report to document the findings of the investigation. The report explicitly characterizes the effort to overturn the 2020 results as a "criminal conspiracy" designed and demanded by Donald Trump rather than the local electors themselves. "Michigan’s Republican elector nominees... did not design or demand this criminal conspiracy," the report states. Nessel argued that continuing to pursue charges against these individuals would be unproductive and unjust, especially given that the primary architect of the plan the sitting President is unlikely to face state-level criminal consequences.

Judge Simmons Rules On Lack Of Criminal Intent

The collapse of the case stems from Judge Simmons’ decision not to bind the defendants over for trial. Simmons, an appointee of Governor Gretchen Whitmer, ruled that the state had not met the evidentiary threshold to prove that the 15 individuals possessed the specific criminal intent required for forgery convictions. While Nessel’s report suggests that an appeals court might have disagreed with Simmons on the technical definition of forgery, her office concluded that proving intent would remain a significant legal hurdle that would exhaust state resources with a low probability of success.