Truth, Accuracy, and Polis’s Preemptive Clemency Toward Peters
We must do better
On May 15, Colorado Governor Jared Polis commuted the nine-year sentence that Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters has been serving following her 2024 conviction for having implemented a criminal scheme to “prove” the Big Lie that Donald Trump was the rightful winner of the 2020 presidential election. In the clemency letter that he sent to Peters and in numerous interviews, Polis offered an explanation for his having taken this act. Like many, I believe that Polis’s action was improper and potentially dangerous. I also believe, however, that much of the criticism of Polis has neglected to present the issue fully and fairly and that such incomplete and even skewed narratives disserve our justice system, our society, and our politics.
Below is a short list of key events in the Tina Peters legal saga:
August 2024 – a jury of her peers convicted Tina Peters
October 2024 – Judge Matthew Barrett sentenced Peters to nine years in prison.
December 2025 – President Donald Trump issued a legally irrelevant “pardon” of Tina Peters
April 2026 – an appeals court found that in determining her sentence, Judge Barrett improperly punished Peters for her First Amendment-protected right to express her belief in debunked conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. The appeals court remanded her sentence back to the trial court for resentencing.
May 15, 2026 – in preemption of trial court action, Gov. Polis ordered the commutation of Peters’s sentence; his order halved her sentence to four and a half years and, crucially, directed that she be released on parole just 17 days later, on June 1. In his clemency letter to Peters, Polis explained that he based his decision on the finding of the appeals court.
At the heart of this situation is the April 2 action of a Colorado appeals court that had considered Peters’s claims that her prosecution and conviction were unjust and, separately, that the length of her sentence constituted an infringement of her free speech rights under the First Amendment. The appeals court rejected Peters’s arguments as to her prosecution and conviction. Below is an excerpt from the appeals court ruling that explains the First Amendment issue:
[In her appeal of her sentence] Peters contends that the trial court violated her First Amendment right under the United States Constitution and her right under article II, section 10 of the Colorado Constitution because it punished her based on her protected speech regarding allegations of election fraud. We agree.
[...]
Here, the trial court’s comments about Peters’s belief in the existence of 2020 election fraud went beyond relevant considerations for her sentencing. Her offense was not her belief, however misguided the trial court deemed it to be, in the existence of such fraud; it was her deceitful actions in her attempt to gather evidence of such fraud. Indeed, under these circumstances, just as her purported beliefs underlying her motive for her actions were not relevant to her defense, the trial court should not have considered those beliefs relevant when imposing sentence.
[...]
[I]t is apparent that the court imposed the lengthy sentence it did because Peters continued to espouse the views that led her to commit these crimes.
[...]
[T]he court’s improper consideration of Peters’s protected speech to impose a longer prison sentence necessarily means the error was substantial.
Thus we remand the matter for resentencing.
Below is how Polis explained his action in the May 15 clemency letter that he sent to Peters (see page 44 of the PDF). Note his affirmation of her guilt and his invocation of the action and argument of the appeals court (emphasis added):
You were sentenced to 6 months in County Jail and 8 years and 3 months in the Department of Corrections, for a total sentence of almost 9 years. The crimes you were convicted of are very serious and you deserve to spend time in prison for these offenses.
However, this is an extremely unusual and lengthy sentence for a first time offender who committed nonviolent crimes.
I agree with the principle highlighted by the Colorado Court of Appeals in your case that, “...the First Amendment generally prohibits punishing someone for their protected speech. ‘[A] court may not punish an individual by imposing a heavier sentence for the exercise of [F]irst [A]mendment rights. . . . A sentence based to any degree on activity or beliefs protected by the [F]irst [A]mendment is constitutionally invalid.’”
Further I agree, in this case, “[T]he trial court’s comments about Peters’s belief in the existence of 2020 election fraud went beyond relevant considerations for her sentencing. Her offense was not her belief, however misguided the trial court deemed it to be, in the existence of such election fraud; it was her deceitful actions in her attempt to gather evidence of such fraud. Indeed, under these circumstances, just as her purported beliefs underlying her motive for her actions were not relevant to her defense, the trial court should not have considered those beliefs relevant when imposing sentence.”
In the evening of May 15, Polis sat for an interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins and explained what he had done. In the course of the interview, Collins and Polis spoke of his clemency letter and of the appeals court ruling. A CNN article about the interview is here. The video below provides the most relevant portions of the interview and the corresponding excerpts from the transcript appear beneath (emphasis added).
POLIS: Look, what the appeals court found, and what I agree, is that fundamentally she deserves time. And she committed four felonies. Those are going to stay on her record. We’re continuing to fight the President’s bogus attempt to pardon her in court.
But the truth of the matter is that her speech, meaning her conspiratorial beliefs and what she believes in, they’re certainly an anathema to me and most of your viewers, and I strongly disagree with. But those are not the basis, and should not be the basis, for a longer sentence than somebody would normally get for this crime, and that’s really what this sentence reduction is all about.
[...]
COLLINS: You noted in your letter explaining this, and her statement that she also put out, that she’s taken responsibility for her crimes and made a commitment to follow the law going forward.
When you look at her website, it says that she’s the victim of a politically-motivated prosecution. They just -- her Twitter account just reposted someone who urged the President to, quote, “INVADE COLORADO if you have to. Do whatever needs to be done to free political prisoner Tina Peters.”
I understand what you’re saying about free speech and what she’s allowed to say. But does that sound like someone who respects the rule of law to you?
POLIS: She has very strange beliefs. She’ll probably continue to have them.
We don’t punish people in this country for having strange beliefs. If you believe the Earth’s flat, you don’t get, and you shouldn’t get, in our nation or my state, a harsher sentence than somebody who believes that the Earth is round.
And that’s what happened here because of her speech and what she believes, which I vehemently disagree with. And I share the passion and the emotions that so many people feel, who are outraged by the words she says. But the place to resolve those differences is by debate, by discourse, by arguing with her, with by disputing her. Not for keeping her behind bars, simply because of what she believes or says.
Later that evening, the media organization MeidasTouch put up a post on Facebook that quoted Polis out of context to dramatically distort what he said. Below is the text of the post in its entirety (emphasis added):
DEM GOV BETRAYS DEMOCRACY: Colorado Governor Jared Polis has commuted the sentence of former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters.
Peters was convicted and sent to prison after illegally allowing a Mike Lindell associate to access and copy sensitive Dominion voting machine data in her Colorado county as part of efforts to chase Donald Trump’s false 2020 election fraud claims. The breach led to passwords and other confidential election information being posted online, jeopardizing election security.
Yet Polis defended his decision on CNN by saying, “We don’t punish people in this country for having strange beliefs.”
That framing is profoundly misleading.
Tina Peters was not imprisoned for her beliefs. She was convicted for abusing her office and compromising the integrity of Colorado’s voting systems.
By reducing this case to a matter of “strange beliefs,” Polis minimizes a serious attack on our democratic process. Election officials who undermine the security of our voting systems must be held accountable, regardless of party.
And when elected officials betray our democracy like this, it’s unforgivable. The letter next to your name does not matter.
Defending democracy means treating attacks on our elections with the seriousness they deserve. Not excusing them as mere differences of opinion.
This was a shameful move by Governor Polis.
MeidasTouch skipped past Polis having said in the interview that “she committed four felonies” and “fundamentally deserves time.” MeidasTouch ignored Polis’s explanation that he grounded his decision in the ruling of the appeals court that the original sentence – not the prosecution and conviction – improperly punished Peters for her “strange beliefs,” beyond what would have been fair punishment for the crimes by themselves.
In perpetrating an inflammatory misrepresentation of Polis’s position, MeidasTouch did its audience – and our civil society and politics – a significant disservice. One can readily get a sense of the damage by reading the comments to the MeidasTouch post, which are replete with scornful vituperation of Polis and many instances in which commenters specifically called out for ridicule the distorted version of Polis’s views that MeidasTouch had fed them. Below are some examples (note that the last one below received 468 likes):
“Strange beliefs. “ It reminds me of how for so many years, those of us erring on the side of inclusion and tolerance would be lectured about how intolerant we were. Eventually, we bought into the messaging that racist viewpoints deserve equal representation, that racist viewpoints can exist alongside democracy. That the local KKK just wanted a place to sell their sheets.
Following his logic, someone attempting to assassinate Trump could be exonerated because of their sincerely held belief that Trump is evil.
She was convicted for breaking the law! Not for strange beliefs. She should have stayed in jail where she belongs.
UNACCEPTABLE! GET HIM OUT! NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW! She broke the law and he decided that “strange beliefs” is enough to let her out. How about this, the your strange beliefs statement and stuff up your ass. You sir are what’s currently wrong in government. FULL STOP!
“Strange beliefs!” She participated in fraud for trump! He’s just lost his next bid for gov’r for sure! A criminal is a criminal is a criminal. When the CRIME IS COMMITTED! Stop with the pardons and forgiveness of these crimes. How is any lesson taught here!?!?
Every serial killer has strange beliefs. Pedophiles believe it’s ok to rape children, that’s a strange belief. WTF?
Polis defended his decision on CNN by saying, “We don’t punish people in this country for strange beliefs” That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard! This was a shameful descusting move by Governor Polis.
She was convicted for her crimes, not her beliefs. What a doofus.
So I can get away with any crime if I frame it as having strange beliefs? Because I have this strange belief that I should be able to break any law I want to without consequences.
We punish people for breaking the law, they don’t get a pass because they “Believe” they were justified. This framing is so dangerous. Judges should care if people are remorseful for their crimes. She won’t even acknowledge that she committed a crime. That matters!!
“Strange beliefs”? Hmph. Gonna try that on the cops if I get pulled over for excessive speed - “Officer, it’s my belief that excessive speed, loud classic rock, wind blowing my hair is critical to my health & well-being”....it’s the Strange Beliefs Effect. 🙄
Before going any further, it is important to make clear that principled people in both major parties have (a) stood up for our democracy and in condemnation of the president and his allies (Peters among them) for their efforts to subvert and overturn it and (b) criticized Polis, often quite harshly, for what he did. As I noted in a September 2025 edition of Decency and Sense (in which I quoted from a February 8 article in the Aurora Sentinel), over 30 current and former Republican Colorado election officials – including five former secretaries of state – issued an open letter in which they condemned the Colorado Republican Party for having asserted that it “Stands with Tina Peters,” calling that position a “slap in the face.”
On May 15 the bipartisan Colorado County Clerks Association (CCCA), whose executive director is Republican Matt Crane, put out a scathing press release. Below are excerpts (emphasis added):
We are furious, disgusted, and deeply disappointed by the Governor’s decision. We have met with him privately to make our position unmistakably clear: Tina Peters deserves the accountability imposed through Colorado’s judicial system, and the Governor should, at the very least, respect that process and allow it to fully play out before intervening.
This case was thoroughly investigated, prosecuted, and adjudicated through the rule of law. Undermining that process before it has fully concluded sends a reckless and dangerous message to the public, to election officials, and to anyone entrusted with safeguarding our democratic institutions.
[...]
Rather than standing with those public servants and defending one of our nation’s most cherished rights, the right to vote, Governor Polis is bending the knee to the same political forces and conspiracy movements that are actively undermining confidence in our democratic institutions. That choice carries consequences far beyond this single case.
[...]
This decision is shameful. It rewards criminal conduct connected to attacks on our election system, weakens confidence in accountability, and undermines the very institutions that protect the freedom to vote. Colorado voters deserve leaders who defend democracy, not leaders who legitimize efforts to damage it.
The lines that I put in bold emphasize what to me is Polis’s critical error. The appeals court had remanded the case back to the trial court. In halving Peters’s original nine-year sentence, Polis preempted the trial court’s opportunity to fulfill the appeals court’s direction to resentence Peters. The district attorney who prosecuted Peters – Dan Rubinstein, a Republican – voiced the same complaint, saying, “The system exists to have an appellate process be functional. That was subverted.”
Polis having rendered the appeals court’s remand irrelevant was bad enough. Consider as well what Polis did with regard to parole. Under her original sentence, Peters was eligible for parole in 2028. Rather than merely move up the date upon which Peters would become eligible, Polis overrode the process and ordered her release on parole effective June 1.
On May 20, the Colorado Democratic Party (CDP) censured Polis. The resolution, adopted by a vote of the CDP’s governing central committee, expressed the same outrage as did the CCCA statement. While I support them both, I fault the CDP statement of censure for having failed to specify what in my view is most egregious: that Polis inserted himself into the ongoing judicial processes not only to preempt the trial court’s reconsideration of her sentence but also to accelerate her release outside of the Colorado parole board’s consideration.
During his May 15 CNN interview, Kaitlan Collins touched upon the pressure that the president and his administration have placed upon Colorado for the release of Tina Peters. An April 2 Colorado Newsline article about the appeals court decision sums this up nicely (though not exhaustively):
As its efforts to free Peters have intensified, the Trump administration has launched an unprecedented pressure campaign targeting Colorado, including the veto of a unanimously passed bill to fund an Arkansas Valley water project, the denial of two disaster declaration requests, and the proposed dismantling of Boulder’s National Center for Atmospheric Research. The moves followed Trump’s threat to take “harsh measures” against Colorado if Peters wasn’t released, and an unnamed senior official appeared to acknowledge their retaliatory motive in comments to The New York Times.
One might suppose – although he denied it – that Polis found at least part of his motivation in the prospect that the leniency he showed toward Peters might bring benefit to Colorado. I find that explanation more plausible than some of the alternatives one sees in angry denunciations of him on social media. A May 17 article in the New York Times (“How a Democratic Governor Came to Release Election Denier Tina Peters from Prison”) reports on conversations about the question of clemency for Peters that Polis had over the course of months with some Colorado leaders. The article does not resolve the issue.
Ultimately, I personally endorse the sentiment below from the CDP censure resolution:
Reducing her sentence now, under pressure from Donald Trump, is not justice. It sends a message to future bad actors that election tampering has consequences, unless you’re friends with the president. That’s a dangerous and disappointing precedent to set.
Colorado has spent years building trust in our elections and proving they are secure. At a time when democracy and voting rights are under attack across the nation, weakening accountability for someone convicted of undermining that trust is a mistake.
Had the trial court on remand reduced the sentence, there would have been little if any ill effect. The problem here lies precisely in the fact that Polis, in acting preemptively, politicized this case. Both Polis and MeidasTouch have undermined trust in institutions that need it as never before.
I would be grateful for readers’ thoughts on this.
Excellent!
Thanks for this post