Judge tosses out case against 15 Michigan ‘false electors,’ including Shelby Township clerk

By: Mary Beth Almond | Shelby-Utica News | Published September 15, 2025

Shutterstock image

SHELBY TOWNSHIP — A judge in 54-A District Court in Ingham County dismissed felony charges against 15 residents, including Shelby Township Clerk Stanley Grot, who were accused of attempting to falsely certify Donald Trump as the state’s winner of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.

Judge Kristen D. Simmons made the call during a court hearing Sept. 9, citing a lack of evidence.

Whether the defendants were “right, wrong or indifferent,” Simmons said they “seriously believed” there were problems with the election.

“I believe they were executing their constitutional right to seek redress,” she stated.

Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, a Democrat, brought the case against the 16 people originally indicted more than two years ago.

Her department alleged that the defendants knowingly signed and submitted forged Electoral College certificates falsely stating Donald Trump had won the presidential election in the state.

Nessel argued that the defendants “falsely claimed” three things.

“One, that they were the duly elected and qualified electors for the state of Michigan. Two, that they convened and organized in the Michigan State Capitol. And three, that Donald J. Trump had won Michigan’s popular vote,” she said.

The defendants each faced eight charges, including forgery and conspiracy to commit election forgery.

After entering into a cooperating agreement with Nessel, the charges were dropped against one of the defendants, James Renner. The other 15 defendants pleaded not guilty.

During the court hearing, Simmons said she saw no intent to commit fraud in the defendants’ actions.

“This is a fraud case and we have to prove intent, and I don’t believe there is evidence sufficient to prove intent,” she said.

In a press conference, Nessel said she believed the judge made a “very wrong decision.”

“The evidence was clear: They lied. They knew they lied, and they tried to steal the votes of millions of Michiganders,” Nessel said. “And if they can get away with this, well, what can’t they get away with next?”

Nessel said her office is “evaluating” a decision about appealing.

Michigan Republican Party Chair Jim Runestad said in a prepared statement that the judge’s ruling “restored the public’s faith” in the justice system.

“All 2020 Trump Electors have officially been vindicated,” he said in the statement.

“This is not only a huge win for these electors, but also for justice itself,” Runestad stated.

Grot said he is “heartened” that Simmons “concluded what I have been saying throughout this case — I did nothing wrong.”

“The past two and a half years have been hell for me. This ordeal has cost me money, has caused me worry and anxiety, and has affected my family, who stood by me throughout this entire process,” Grot said in a prepared statement. “I thank God for His grace during this trying time and appreciate the attention and courtesy Judge Simmons gave to this case.”

Grot’s attorney, Derek S. Wilczynski, said the case “never should have been filed or pursued” by the attorney general.

“As Judge Simmons properly determined, the evidence presented by the government showed that the Republican electors were exercising their first amendment rights by signing a document which only said that they were casting their electoral votes for President Trump and Vice-President Pence. The document produced by the government did not state that President Trump had more votes than former Vice-President (at the time) Biden or force any election official to even accept the document,” Wilczynski said in an email.

“It was signed to ensure that if, for some reason, President Trump ended up with more votes than former Vice-President Biden, there would be no question that the Republican electors had fulfilled their duty by completing the form. The Attorney General, in claiming that the Republican electors took the position that President Trump had more votes than his opponent, is now arguing against the evidence her assistant attorney general submitted to the Court.”