Judge sets dates, next steps for Lake's challenge of election results

The judge overseeing Arizona GOP gubernatorial nominee Kari Lake's legal challenge of the results of her election said in hearing Tuesday that oral arguments in the case will begin early next week.

Lake's lawsuit alleges numerous issues in the administration of the 2022 general election in Maricopa County, in which she faced off against Hobbs for the governor's seat and Hobbs was certified the winner.

The suit was filed Friday and is against Governor-elect and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, the county Board of Supervisors, and county Director of Elections Scott Jarrett, all of whom were ordered to appear before the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County on Tuesday for the emergency hearing.

Lake attended the hearing via video conference with her attorney, as did the legal counsel for the defendants, who did not appear to attend.

The timeline set for the case is for the defendants to file their motions to dismiss by noon local time Thursday, with a unified response due from all defendants by Saturday at noon.

Replies are then due by 5 p.m. Sunday, and oral argument will begin Monday morning.

The arguments will last for two hours, with each side having an hour to present their case.

If the judge chooses to not dismiss the case after Monday's arguments,  the trial will begin on Dec. 21 and end on Dec. 22, lasting from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. each day, with the time divided equally between the plaintiff and defendants.

During the hearing on Tuesday, the judge ruled to seal the voter information presented in the case from public view, after legal counsel for the defendants claimed that personal information wasn't redacted. The plaintiff's legal counsel said that all personally identifiable information was redacted.

Lake's legal counsel asked for two days to inspect some ballots for the case and one of the lawyers for a defendant objected. The judge ruled that Lake's counsel could submit a request regarding inspection of the ballots and the defendants could respond before the judge makes a decision.