The Arizona judge's decision might be an outcome-driven obstruction of the due process of Section 2 of the 14th Amendment (14A) imo, that section a penalty for states where vote-counting fraud has occurred.
Excerpted from 14A:
"Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." [Apportionment of Representatives]
As a side note to this post as it concerns Section 2, please consider the following.
Consider that the post-Civil War congressional Republicans who drafted Section 2 made it to discourage southern Democrats (my word) from rigging the ballot boxes that Democrats are now alleged to have done for 2020, and now 2022 elections!
Apportionment of Representatives
Getting back to Section 2, I'll add the judge's questionable decision about Lake's vote-counting fraud evidence to Section 2's catch-all "in any way abridged" wording.
In other words, the Arizona judge may not only be obstructing the due process of Section 2, but may also be violating that section too.
H O W E V E R...
Let's examine a more glaring (imo) constitutional problem with alleged vote-counting problems of the 2020 elections so we will be better prepared to deal with it again in 2024.
To begin with, there are typically controversies with federal elections, especially presidential elections imo. This because the corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties are not about to surrender state powers that the feds have been legislatively stealing from the states for the last 100+ years back to the states imo.
Democrats Have Objected to Electoral Vote Certification For the Last 3 GOP Presidents (1.1.21)
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936
With the fed's constitutionally limited powers versus constitutionally indefensible promises of federal office candidates in mind, let's go back to the voting-counting fraud allegations of J6, 2021.
The allegations were wrongly ignored by Congress imo, the court of public opinion needing to enter a guilty verdict for a bunch of lawmakers who once again blatantly ignored state non-compliance (imo) with the 12th Amendment (12A).
More specifically, the states surrendered their power to make so-called electoral vote "winner take all" laws for example, when they ratified that amendment imo. (Other serious problems with state compliance with 12A too imo.)
Excerpted from the 12th Amendment:
"12th Amendment: The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate [emphasis added], ..."
In fact, Justice Joseph Story had emphasized that the overall effect of a state with divided electoral votes is that it reduces number of electoral votes for a single candidate.
"In case of any party divisions in a state, it may neutralize its whole vote, while all the other states give an unbroken electoral vote." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833."
Again, J6 federal lawmakers need to be charged with failing to do their sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution by voting to refuse to do their duty to police state compliance with 12A, evidenced by unconstitutional (imo) state "winner take all" laws for electoral votes.
Lawmakers also violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment (imo) by ignoring 12A, and should lose their offices as a consequence imo.
"14th Amendment, Section 3: No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof [emphases added]. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."
Note that 12A would probably have undergone more public scrutiny if Congress had not "resolved" alleged electoral vote-counting problems on J6, crook lawmakers probably not willing to address ordinary citizen questions concerning government / media electoral vote-counting circus versus 12A.
Finally, consider that the states have never expressly constitutionally given ordinary qualified citizen voters the specific power to vote for POTUS like we have for voting for members of federal Congress. So a part of the problem with processing electoral votes is political party "smoke and mirrors" in converting citizen votes to 12A-limited number of electoral votes, so-called unconstitutional (imo) "winner take all" state laws fore electoral votes discussed earlier evidence of this.
In other words, citizens have been indoctrinated to think that they control who the next POTUS will be, this deliberate confusion arguably a backdoor excuse for uniparty to steal presidential elections.
Since this is going to appeal, I suspect every constitutional angle will be mulled over...