Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell did nothing to stop fraudsters who crammed a proposition in support of Ranked Choice Voting on the November 2024 ballot.
That lack of action has raised question about the fact that Mitchell is now touting her decision to prosecute a lone petition gatherer, Michele Lee Brimmer, whose fraudulent efforts did nothing to change the outcome of the election.
In August 2024, the Arizona Supreme Court stunned lawyers and politicos when it ruled that Proposition 140 could be on the ballot despite the fact that nearly 40,000 duplicate signatures caused the measure to lack the minimum number of signatures required to qualify for the ballot. Prop 140, which sought to enact a California-style election scheme built around Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) and jungle primaries, should have never appeared on the ballot, causing opponents to spend millions of dollars trying to convince voters to kill it.
Although voters did kill the RCV measure at the polls, opponents hoped that at the very least Mitchell or Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes would be investigate the deep-pocketed fraudsters behind Prop 140’s petition campaign and be held to account.
To date, no action has been taken by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office or the Arizona Attorney General’s Office in the case of Prop 140.
Mitchell announced on Thursday that Brimmer was indicted on multiple charges related to election petition fraud. The indictment includes one count of Fraudulent Schemes and Practices, a Class Five Felony; four counts of Forgery, Class Four Felonies; and nine counts of False Signature on a Petition, Class One Misdemeanors.
Brimmer, while working as a petition signature gatherer, submitted petitions that ultimately placed Proposition 139, the Right to Abortion Initiative, on the 2024 election ballot. An investigation later found that several signatures belonged to individuals who denied signing the petition and did not recognize the signatures as their own.
The initiative had enough valid signatures to be placed on the ballot and it passed.
“I want to make it clear that the number of signatures we are talking about would not have made a difference as to whether this proposition got on the ballot,” said Mitchell. “That said, we are talking about a case that involved fraudulent signatures placed on an election petition. That is a crime, and it undermines public trust in elections. It will not be tolerated and those who engage in such conduct will be held accountable.”
“The Supreme Court allowed Prop 140 on the ballot when it clearly did not qualify. That undermines the public’s trust,” said one former prosecutor. “What undermines the public trust more, however, is the fact that Mitchell has done nothing to improve public trust in elections. Unless you count going after the little guys in cases that never made a difference in the first place.”