An Arizona Court of Appeals panel has ruled that Attorney General Kris Mayes failed to properly justify withholding public records tied to her office’s communications with an outside legal advocacy group in the state’s “fake electors” investigation.
The court found Mayes’ office did not adequately support its claims that communications with the States United Democracy Center were protected by attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. Judges said the privilege log provided was too vague and lacked sufficient context for judicial review, preventing a proper assessment of whether the exemptions applied.
Writing for a unanimous panel, Judge Jeffrey Sklar said the index contained “no context” that would allow a court to evaluate the withheld material, ordering the case returned to the trial court for a more detailed description of the documents and the basis for withholding them. The court also found the Attorney General’s Office failed to conduct a sufficiently broad search for responsive records, including limitations in its keyword and date filtering.
Attempts to proceed against the remaining defendants are currently paused after a trial judge ruled that prosecutors withheld relevant information from the grand jury that issued the original indictment. Mayes has since appealed that decision to the Arizona Supreme Court.
