President Trump has issued a controversial pardon to former Colorado county clerk Tina Peters, who is serving nine years in state prison for election-related crimes, despite constitutional questions about presidential authority over state convictions.
Story Highlights
- Trump pardons Tina Peters, a former Colorado clerk serving a 9-year state sentence for voting machine access crimes
- Constitutional scholars and Colorado officials argue that presidents cannot pardon state crimes, only federal offenses
- A jury convicted Peters on seven charges, including criminal impersonation and influencing public servants
- Trump claims Peters was a “patriot” seeking election integrity, though she was prosecuted by a Republican district attorney
Trump Defends Election Integrity Advocate
President Trump announced Thursday evening on Truth Social his decision to pardon Tina Peters, declaring that “Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our Elections were Fair and Honest.”
The president characterized Peters as sitting in Colorado prison for the “crime” of demanding honest elections, positioning her case within his broader narrative about 2020 election integrity concerns.
Trump pardons jailed ex-Colorado election official Tina Peters, but she was charged in state court https://t.co/Osw4JsSKxB
— CBS News (@CBSNews) December 12, 2025
Constitutional Authority Challenged by State Officials
Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold immediately contested Trump’s constitutional authority, stating that “Trump has no constitutional authority to pardon her.
His assault is not just on our democracy, but on states’ rights and the American Constitution.” Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser reinforced this position, emphasizing that states maintain independent sovereignty over their criminal justice systems without federal government interference.
The constitutional principle at stake centers on the president’s pardon power, which applies to “Offences against the United States” and is universally understood to exclude state crimes.
Democrat Governor Jared Polis noted that Peters was convicted by a jury, prosecuted by a Republican District Attorney in a Republican county, making this purely a state law matter.
Peters’ Conviction and Legal Proceedings
Peters, former Mesa County clerk, was convicted in state court on seven charges, including three counts of attempting to influence a public servant and conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation.
Prosecutors alleged she executed a deceptive scheme in 2021 that allowed unauthorized access to Mesa County voting machines, with images from the equipment later appearing online. She was sentenced to nine years in October 2024.
Judge Matthew Barrett called Peters “as defiant as a defendant as this court has ever seen” during sentencing. However, Peters maintained she “never done anything with malice to break the law.” A federal magistrate judge recently rejected her request for release during appeals, demonstrating the legal system’s resistance to her claims.
Unprecedented Legal Territory
Peters’ attorney, Peter Ticktin, acknowledged the unprecedented nature of this constitutional question, stating that the issue “has never been raised in any court.”
He thanked Trump for the pardon while arguing Peters should be released pending legal resolution. This case represents uncharted constitutional territory that will likely require judicial determination about the scope of presidential pardon power versus state sovereignty.
