In addition to his work on the bogus voter list — which included both Ward and her husband, Michael — Ward used his perch atop Arizona’s GOP to fuel bogus voter fraud allegations in the weeks following the conclusion of the vote. The two districts also joined a lawsuit against then-Vice President Mike Pence in late December 2020, amid a campaign by Trump to pressure Pence to help overturn the election.
It’s unclear whether Ward intends to appeal the decision. A lawyer for her did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The select committee is nearing the end of its year-long investigation and aims to produce a final report by December. More than two dozen witnesses have filed a lawsuit to block the panel’s efforts to subpoena them to testify and obtain records or obtain phone records from providers including T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T.
The committee has fought some of the subpoenas and won a series of rulings bolstering its investigation, but it has also chosen not to aggressively pursue a large number of prosecutions, instead targeting those likely to have the greatest impact. on his efforts. These include lawsuits to obtain testimony and records from former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, attorney John Eastman and Trump himself, who unsuccessfully sued to prevent the National Archives to release his White House records to the panel.
In his lawsuit, Ward had argued that the select committee’s subpoena was improperly issued because the panel had no valid legislative purpose — rather than it being a disguised investigation into law enforcement — and that the panel didn’t have the required 13 members it was supposed to include. Ward argued that the committee’s subpoena was actually an effort to harass Trump supporters for exercising their First Amendment rights to petition the government and raise doubts about the election results.
But Humetewa, a President Barack Obama appointee, said Ward’s evidence on both allegations was insufficient.
The panel, she said, had repeatedly seen its work ratified by votes from the full House, which notably endorsed the committee’s efforts to hold several provocative witnesses in defiance of Congress. Humetewa said she would not question the House’s decision to allow the committee to operate despite a reduced membership.
Additionally, Humetewa cited the decision of the federal appeals court based in Washington, DC, which found that the committee served a very valid legislative purpose.
“The Court finds that this evidence fails to meet the formidable hurdle plaintiffs must overcome to demonstrate an invalid legislative purpose,” she wrote.