Sidney Powell Just Received A Big Win In Court

Former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell won a big victory in a U.S Appeals Court last week.

A federal judge of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago ruled to “not revive Democrat Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers’ bid for sanctions against Powell.”

Powell and her legal team were able to persuade the Appeals court to not sanction her from practicing law for filing multiple lawsuits in Wisconsin which aimed to combat election fraud.

The appeal court affirms a previous decision from a judge who ruled Evers’s attempt to sanction Powell was “a late ambush of a losing party.”

Conservative lawyer and Donald Trump ally Sidney Powell persuaded a U.S. appeals court to rule on Wednesday that she should not be sanctioned for her failed lawsuit seeking to overturn Trump's loss in Wisconsin in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.https://t.co/zRGSrRz3h9.

— The Silent Majority (@siIentmajority) August 8, 2023

Reuters had these details to share:

Conservative lawyer and Donald Trump ally Sidney Powell persuaded a U.S. appeals court to rule on Wednesday that she should not be sanctioned for her failed lawsuit seeking to overturn Trump’s loss in Wisconsin in the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

The 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago refused to revive Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers’ bid for sanctions against Powell and her team for “vexatiously” litigating baseless claims in the lawsuit, which alleged massive election fraud in the state.

Affirming a judge’s earlier decision, the panel said Evers’ request for sanctions came too late in the lower court, likening it to “a late ambush of a losing party.”

Lawyers for Evers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Powell also could not immediately be reached. She has previously denied wrongdoing in connection with her election fraud claims.

Powell played a leading role in promoting false voter fraud claims after the 2020 election, filing several unsuccessful lawsuits contesting former Republican president Trump’s loss in battleground states that Democrat Joe Biden won. A Michigan federal judge sanctioned Powell for bringing frivolous claims in one of the cases in 2021, in a decision that an appeals court mostly upheld in June.

#BreakingNow The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals agrees that sanctions should not have been imposed on us for our Wisconsin election fraud suit. Read the opinion at https://t.co/bQMKRLyqCc @DefendingtheRep @ADFLegal @RaheemKassam @DineshDSouza @scrowder @julie_kelly2 @KariLake

— Sidney Powell 🇺🇸 🗽⚖️🚜🇺🇸 Attorney & Author (@SidneyPowell1) August 2, 2023

Per Defend The Republic:

Defending the Republic is proud to announce that today, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals denied a baseless appeal by Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers which sought the issuance of sanctions relating to a lawsuit filed to challenge the certification of the results of the 2020 presidential election in Wisconsin.

The request for sanctions from Governor Evers was filed after a Wisconsin federal district court had dismissed a lawsuit – based on standing, not on the merits – from William Feehan, which sought to decertify Wisconsin’s 2020 election results and enjoin Governor Evers from certifying Wisconsin’s electoral votes for Joe Biden. The federal district court correctly rejected the motion, observing that the motion was untimely and it did not have jurisdiction to consider sanctions.

The Seventh Circuit agreed. Importantly, it rejected arguments from Governor Evers that the Court of Appeals should overrule its precedent that a district court cannot make a ruling for sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 where it lacks jurisdiction. As the Seventh Circuit noted, Governor Evers could have “easily” complied with the rules by filing his sanctions motion while the case was still pending. His late filing was not sufficient to change long-standing precedent, especially in “high-speed, high-pressure lawsuits” that challenge the results of an election.

In addition, the Seventh Circuit reiterated the district court’s decision not to impose sanctions under its inherent authority or under Section 1927. Specifically, the Circuit writes that the “district court made clear that it would not have treated this as the sort of rare case where post-judgment sanctions imposed under inherent authority would have been needed to protect the court’s institutional integrity.” (See Opinion, Page 2).