(Ken Silva, Headline USA) In May 2023, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes hired a non-profit group called “States United Democracy Center” to help target conservatives who dared contest the state’s controversial 2020 election results. About 11 months later, Mayes announced indictments in Arizona’s so-called “fake electors” case.
Fast forward another year, and allegations have surfaced in court that States United is apparently acting as a cutout for the Democratic Attorneys General Association (DAGA)—a group that, in turn, has donated $200,000 to Mayes. In other words, a group closely aligned with the Democratic Party may have paid the Arizona AG to hire its cutout to help target Republicans, according to a court filing from one of the defendants, Christina Bobb.
In the bombshell June 4 filing, Bobb’s attorney said the apparent scheme was exposed due to an “error” from the Arizona AG’s office, which filed a States United legal memo as an exhibit. After the leak, prosecutors have allegedly refused to disclose more info about their relationship with States United.
Bobb, who was Donald Trump’s lawyer when the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago, now seeks to disqualify both the Arizona AG and States United over what she describes as a tangled web of impropriety.
“The Attorney General and her office have abused the laws regulating the use of outside counsel and has involved herself and her office in irreparable conflicts of interest,” Bobb’s June 4 court filing states. “As a result, she and her staff have violated their oaths of office under the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct, while creating a significant appearance of impropriety, and should be disqualified from prosecuting this matter.”
The Arizona AG and States United have yet to respond to Bobb’s filing, which outlines the relationship between States United, DAGA, and the Arizona AG.
A Tangled Web
According to the June 4 filing, Mayes hired States United in May 2023. Several months later, she received a $50,000 contribution from DAGA.
Mayes and States United prepped their case for the rest of 2023 and into 2024, announcing indictments in April of that year against seven former Trump attorneys and 11 Arizona Republicans. Again, Mayes received another $150,000 from DAGA several months later.
Democratic Party-Aligned Group Covertly Working w/ Arizona AG in ‘Fake Electors’ Case
In May 2023, Arizona AG Kris Mayes hired a non-profit group called “States United” to help target conservatives who dared contest the controversial 2020 election results. About 11 months later,… pic.twitter.com/lEB2ivyix4
— Ken Silva (@JD_Cashless) June 18, 2025
“Could Attorney General Mayes have received the two payments totaling $200,000 for a lawful unrelated purpose? Yes. However, there’s a significant appearance of impropriety when the payments come after Kris Mayes is in office [and she] gives a level of prosecutorial authority [to States United] … and the payments just so happen to be around the same time (a) the grand jury investigation was open and then (b) arrests were made of the groups’ political opponents,” Bobb’s June 4 filing states.
“The logical next question is will there be a third payment if she secures a conviction?”
Along with noting the timing of the payments, Bobb’s court filing reveals how States United is essentially a front organization for DAGA.
Indeed, States United, which was founded by Democratic lawfare operative Marc Elias in 2020, says on its website that it’s “an initiative” of the Progressive State Leadership Committee (PSLC). And PSLC, in turn, is an apparent sister organization to DAGA, according to Bobb’s court filing.
“PSLC has the exact same address, president, executive director, and nearly identical leadership team as [DAGA], which is a committee of the Democratic Party. Additionally, DAGA pays the salaries of the PSLC employees, according to their most recently available Tax Form 990,” states Bobb’s June 4 filing, which seeks to disqualify both the Arizona AG and States United from participating in the case further. “PSLC and DAGA are the same people, sitting in the same building in Washington DC, getting paid from the same bank account.”
Bobb’s filing also notes that Mayes’ predecessor Republican Mark Brnovich, had declined to pursue the matter, referring it to the Justice Department instead.
Her filing further suggests that Mayes, who won her own controversial election by a 280-vote margin in 2022 following irregularities in Maricopa County and elsewhere, needed the contributions from NAGA so that she could pay legal fees associated with the election challenge brought by her opponent, Abraham Hamadeh.
Other Case Updates
Meanwhile, Mayes is also dealing with other roadblocks to her case. Last month, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Sam Myers ordered the case be sent back to a grand jury to determine whether there’s probable cause that the defendants committed the crimes.
The decision, first reported by the Washington Post, centered on the Electoral Count Act, a law that governs the certification of a presidential contest and was part of the defendants’ claims they were acting lawfully.
While the law was discussed when the case was presented to the grand jury and the panel asked a witness about the law’s requirements, prosecutors didn’t show the statute’s language to the grand jury, Myers wrote. The judge said a prosecutor has a duty to tell grand jurors all the applicable law and concluded the defendants were denied “a substantial procedural right as guaranteed by Arizona law.”
Richie Taylor, a spokesperson for AG Mayes, said last month in a statement that prosecutors will appeal the decision. “We vehemently disagree with the court,” Taylor said.
In all, 18 Republicans were charged with forgery, fraud and conspiracy. The defendants consist of 11 Republicans who submitted a document claiming Trump won Arizona, two former Trump aides and five lawyers connected to the former president, including Rudy Giuliani.
Two defendants have already resolved their cases, while the others have pleaded not guilty to the charges. Trump wasn’t charged in Arizona, but the indictment refers to him as an unindicted coconspirator.
Most of the defendants in the case also are trying to get a court to dismiss their charges under an Arizona law that bars using baseless legal actions in a bid to silence critics.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Ken Silva is the editor of Headline USA. Follow him at x.com/jd_cashless.
