LANSING, Mich. (Michigan News Source) – What started as a high-stakes election prosecution just hit a legal brick wall after a Hillsdale County judge dismissed all felony charges against Adams Township Clerk Stephanie Scott, dealing a major blow to Dana Nessel’s office and its handling of election-related cases.
From four felonies… to zero.
According to a press release from Kallman Legal Group, Hillsdale Circuit Court Judge Sara Lisznyai ruled on Thursday, April 30 that the statute used to charge Scott simply didn’t say what prosecutors claimed it did. David Kallman, Scott’s attorney, told Michigan News Source, “Once again, the attorney general is making it up.”
MORE NEWS: Floodwaters Continue to Ground Flights at Pellston Regional Airport as Runways Close Until Next Week
The Attorney General’s case hinged on the idea that Scott improperly shared election data. However, the court found no “confidentiality” requirement existed in the law. Without that key piece, the entire felony case collapsed.
David Kallman said in his press release that the ruling was a “complete vindication” and argued the charges should never have been filed in the first place. Scott echoed that sentiment, saying she was grateful the court “followed the law” in tossing the charges.
What was this case even about?
The case dates back to the aftermath of the 2020 election, when Scott allegedly provided election-related data to attorney Stefanie Lambert and an outside expert to review for potential irregularities. Prosecutors claimed that crossed the line into criminal conduct. But the defense argued – and the judge agreed – that nothing in the law made her actions a felony.
Kallman said in his press release, “The Court recognized what we have argued all along: there was never any criminal statute applicable to her proper and legal actions and, therefore, no crime was committed.”
Scott refused to follow state election directives after the 2020 election and declined to delete election data after 7 days, as ordered by the Bureau of Elections. Instead, she cited Michigan law that requires election records to be preserved for up to 22 months. She also refused to turn over voting equipment, including tabulators, for routine vendor maintenance, arguing she was protecting the integrity of the machines and their data. Prosecutors later used those decisions – along with allegations that outside individuals were given access to election data – as the basis for multiple felony charges.
Second strike against AG’s election cases.
Kallman also pointed to a broader trend in his press release, noting this is now the second election- related case his firm has won against the Attorney General’s office. He said, “Just like last year’s alternate electors case that we won on behalf of Hank Choate, this case should never have been brought. Our client is a local public official trying to carry out her lawful duties and the Attorney General weaponized criminal statutes against her in a manner never used in Michigan’s history. As a result, she was subjected to years of unwarranted legal jeopardy. Today’s decision restores her reputation and reaffirms the rule of law.”
When your lawyer becomes the story.
MORE NEWS: Mallory McMorrow Deletes Thousands of Tweets, Including Posts Critical of Michigan
Another wrinkle in the case involves attorney and co-defendant Stefanie Lambert, the controversial lawyer Scott consulted with about her election concerns. According to defense attorney David Kallman, Lambert’s involvement may have drawn added scrutiny from the Attorney General’s office. He suggested the case wasn’t just about Scott’s actions as a clerk, but also about targeting Lambert, who has been tied to multiple high-profile election-related legal battles.
Kallman told Michigan News Source that retaining legal counsel to review election data is a lawful and appropriate step for a public official, ensuring they receive proper guidance on how to proceed and fulfill their duties in compliance with the law. He questioned whether the same prosecution would have happened if Scott had chosen a more mainstream law firm instead. In his view, Scott’s biggest misstep may have been in “hiring the wrong attorney,” a decision he believes put her squarely in the crosshairs.
Not completely over… yet.
Before anyone declares total victory, there’s still a small piece left. Kallman says that Scott’s case has been sent back to district court on one remaining misdemeanor, tied to allegedly disobeying a directive from the Secretary of State.
Still, compared to the original slate of felonies – which carried potential prison time – that’s a dramatic downgrade. As Kallman put it, the difference between a misdemeanor and multiple felonies is “quite a difference.”
The bottom line.
For now, the story is clear: a case that once carried serious felony accusations has been whittled down to a single misdemeanor. Whether the Attorney General chooses to appeal the dismissal of the felony charges or quietly move on could determine if this legal saga is finally winding down – or just gearing up for another round.
