Strongly hinting in a social media post on Tuesday that he’ll grant clemency to Tina Peters, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis compared the former county clerk’s 2020 election interference case to that of former state Sen. Sonya Jaquez Lewis, a Democrat who was recently sentenced to probation.
In his post, the Democratic governor said it’s “not lost on me” that Jaquez Lewis “was convicted of the exact same felony charge as Tina Peters — attempting to influence a public official — and yet Tina Peters, as a non-violent first time offender got a nine year sentence.”
It’s true that both Peters and Jaquez Lewis were convicted of the same charge (among other charges in their respective cases). But does that make their cases comparable such that the latter should guide any clemency decisions about the former?
A review of the two prosecutions suggests not.
Let’s look at them below, while being mindful of the reality that political considerations seem to be guiding Polis’ potential bid to appease President Donald Trump, who wants his supporter freed and apparently has been retaliating against Colorado in the meantime.
‘Send a message’
Jaquez Lewis was convicted of one count of attempting to influence a public servant and three counts of forgery. In a press release on her sentencing, the Denver District Attorney’s Office summarized the case by saying that in January 2025, “in the midst of an investigation by the Colorado Senate Committee on Ethics, Lewis forged several letters supposedly written by former aides to refute allegations that Lewis was mistreating her staff.” Denver DA John Walsh said the case “should send the message that elected officials will be held accountable when they break the law and violate the public’s trust.”
So, with Jaquez Lewis, we have a serious case in which a politician received a non-jail sentence.
It may be tempting then, as Polis did, to lump Peters’ case into that general category of abusing public trust — this time with a Republican instead of a Democrat — to make it seem like eliminating the remainder of Peters’ term (if that’s what Polis winds up doing) would be bipartisan justice in action.
‘Conspiracy theories’
But consider that Peters’ more severe sentence reflects more severe conduct.
The state summarized the case against her in a court filing after her conviction: “While serving as the Clerk and Recorder of Mesa County, Ms. Peters deceived county employees to obtain credentials that allowed an unauthorized person to access Mesa County’s voting system after the 2020 election.” The state added that “even after her conviction, she reaffirmed her position that her conduct was justified by her conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.”
When he sentenced Peters, Judge Matthew Barrett said that “this case was about your corrupt conduct and how no one is above the law.” Looking beyond this one case, the judge said, “I consider deterrence in sentencing that is both general and specific that the sentence I impose must deter Ms. Peters from engaging in similar conduct in the future, but it also must deter others generally from engaging in this type of conduct.”
Peters was convicted of three counts of attempting to influence a public servant and one count each of conspiracy to commit criminal impersonation, official misconduct, violation of duty and failing to comply with requirements of Colorado’s secretary of state.
Among the differences between Peters’ and Jaquez Lewis’ convictions is that Peters was found guilty of three counts of attempting to influence a public servant, while Jaquez Lewis was convicted of one count. That doesn’t automatically make Peters’ case three times as serious, but it’s one factor among many that cuts against Polis’ attempt to reduce the cases to their common charge. As the Republican prosecutor who brought the case against Peters, Dan Rubinstein, observed in response to Polis’ post, “The suggestion that everyone convicted under the same statute should receive the same sentence overlooks why the legislature created a [sentencing] range in the first place: no two crimes and no two defendants are the same.” The prosecutor added that modifying Peters’ sentence “would be a gross injustice to the affected citizens I represent.” On the subject of Peters’ sentence, it’s worth pointing out that a Colorado appeals court panel earlier this year reportedly raised concerns about her prison term. Of course, the possibility that appellate judges could decide to reduce her sentence doesn’t make Polis’ point any stronger. If anything, it makes it even stranger for him to intervene at this stage because a politician might naturally take political cover under whatever the courts decide. Also, Peters’ inmate record reportedly shows she’s eligible for parole in 2028 — which isn’t to minimize any time spent in prison, even if the sentence is justified, but it would make Polis’ intervention stand out even more. That Polis may do so nevertheless underscores the leverage that Trump is wielding over the state and, in turn, the governor’s apparent willingness to consider bending to it. If he does bend, it’s important to remember the difference between a commutation, which shortens a sentence, and a pardon, which is a starker statement symbolizing something closer to forgiveness. Trump previously “pardoned” Peters, which is in quotes because it’s legally meaningless; she was convicted of state crimes over which the president lacks clemency power. If Trump had such power, we wouldn’t be analyzing Polis’ potential clemency today. Still, as with another of Trump’s pardons for 2020 election–related crimes, the legally limp move sent a strong signal that the president supports the subversive behavior taken on his behalf and, as importantly, that he’ll continue to support such behavior in the future however he can. If Polis were to commute Peters’ sentence and not pardon her, then in theory that wouldn’t signal approval of her conduct but rather a disapproval of her sentence for that conduct. All things considered, that important legal distinction might be a thin reed for the public to hold onto. And as shown above, even commutation isn’t justified on the basis of a comparison to the Jaquez Lewis sentence; probation in one case doesn’t warrant a jailbreak in the other. But if the governor does take that step, hopefully he can make a more convincing case than the one he attempted in his social media post.
Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro," a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined MS NOW, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.
Latest Post
Recommended
‘Gross injustice’
