Donald J. Trump for President v. Katie Hobbs

University / Undergraduate
Modified: 12th Jan 2024
Wordcount: 354 words


Law Expert

Disclaimer: This case brief was produced by one of our law study experts as an informational resource for law students and professionals researching case law. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of

Cite This


Donald J. Trump for President v. Katie Hobbs as Case No. CV2020-014083

Short case name: Trump v. Katie Hobbs


The case Donald J. Trump for President v. Katie Hobbs was filed in 2020 after the general elections. The plaintiff, Donald J. Trump for President, Inc presumably represented by his lawyers, challenged the authenticity and fairness of the process used to count the ballot papers in Arizona (Biskupic, 2020). The defendant was Katie Hobbs, the Secretary of State for Arizona.


The main issue under consideration in this case was the fairness and transparency of the election process. The plaintiff argued that the use of Sharpies to mark the ballot papers caused an 'overvote' issue. The Maricopa County election officials reportedly encouraged voters to use Sharpies on their ballots. However, the plaintiff claimed that the use of sharpie pens caused an 'overvote,' leading to the discarding of legitimate votes (McCarthy, 2020). The plaintiff asked the court to declare these votes valid and to be included in the final tally.

Holding and Rule

The court, presided over by Judge Daniel Kiley, found no evidence supporting the plaintiff's claim. The court ruled in favor of Hobbs, stating that the plaintiffs' testimony regarding 'overvote' didn't have any proof of the miscounting or discarding of votes. Interpreting Arizona's election laws, the court stated that an 'overvote' refers to a situation where a voter marks more choices than permitted (Biskupic, 2020).


The plaintiff, without solid proof to substantiate their claims, chose to drop the lawsuit against Katie Hobbs (McCarthy, 2020). Thus, the court did not have to issue a decision, and the case was dismissed with prejudice (Biskupic, 2020).


Biskupic, J. (2020) 'With outliers in key battleground states, Trump’s legal push is falling flat', CNN.

McCarthy, B. (2020) 'Fact-checking false claims about Pennsylvania’s election', PolitiFact.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Get Academic Help Today!

Encrypted with a 256-bit secure payment provider