Former Colorado clerk will remain in state prison after a federal judge rejects her bid for freedom

Federal magistrate judge Scott Varholak ruled Monday that Peters didn’t make a case that he should get involved in overturning her state sentence.

Peters' attorney, John Case, said in an emailed statement that they were disappointed in the ruling. He maintained that Peters is innocent and that voting machines can't be trusted.

"When Tina is released, and she will be released in time, hopefully soon, it will mean that we are healing from the atrocities which have befallen Tina and the people of Colorado," Case wrote.

A message left with the Colorado attorney general's office seeking comment on the ruling wasn't immediately returned Monday.

Trump and others have called for Peters' release

Peters argued that the magistrate judge should free her because she said the state judge who sentenced her to nine years behind bars violated her First Amendment rights. Peters claimed he punished her for making allegations about election fraud, but prosecutors argued that the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed judges to consider people’s speech during sentencings if they deem it relevant.

During Peters’ October 2024 sentencing, Judge Matthew Barrett called the defendant a “charlatan” and said she posed a danger to the community for spreading lies about voting and undermining the democratic process.

Peters was unapologetic and insisted that everything she did was geared toward trying to unroot what she believed was fraud. She claimed her actions were done for the greater good.

Her lawyers argued that Barrett was wrong to call Peters' statements “lies” and said there was no evidence her speech posed a danger.

President Donald Trump and other supporters, including retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the national security adviser during Trump’s first term, have called for Peters to be released. In August, Trump warned he would “take harsh measures” if Peters wasn’t freed, saying she was old and very sick.

“Let Tina Peters out of jail, RIGHT NOW. She did nothing wrong, except catching the Democrats cheat in the Election,” Trump posted Aug. 21 on his Truth Social platform.

Flynn has said Peters, 70, should be moved into federal custody because she could be a witness into an investigation of the 2020 election.

Colorado clerks say there is no evidence of widespread cheating in elections

The administration sent a letter to the Colorado prison system in mid-November asking that Peters be transferred to federal custody. One her lawyers said he believed the request was made so Peters could more easily be involved in the investigation into the election.

There is no evidence of any widespread cheating in Colorado elections, which have been staunchly defended by county clerks throughout the state, most of whom are Republican. Peters was prosecuted by an elected Republican district attorney, and the three supervisors in her conservative-leaning county also supported the case and defended the integrity of the state’s elections.

The U.S. Justice Department got involved in Peters’ federal case in March, saying “reasonable concerns” had been raised about her prosecution. It also said the DOJ was reviewing whether the prosecution was “oriented more toward inflicting political pain than toward pursuing actual justice or legitimate governmental objectives,” a line from an executive order entitled “Ending the Weaponization of The Federal Government” that Trump signed shortly after his inauguration.

The state objected to the federal government inserting itself, saying the statement the department filed in the case appeared to be a “naked, political attempt” to intimidate the court or Peters’ prosecutors. It unsuccessfully asked for the court to reject it.

Peters’ lawyers pointed to three cases in which federal judges ordered people convicted of state crimes to be released from prison while they appealed, including one involving free speech. In that 1977 case, a judge freed the late Native American activist Russell Means after he was placed back behind bars because he remained active in the American Indian Movement while free on bond from state custody. The state court had largely barred him from participating in the group. The federal judge ruled that was an unconstitutional limit on his First Amendment rights of speech and association.

Peters challenged her imprisonment under a constitutional provision known as habeas corpus.

Associated Press writer Mead Gruver in Fort Collins, Colorado, contributed to this report.