Tina Peters, the first election official to face a felony conviction linked to the 2020 election conspiracy narratives, claims her detractors and the judiciary wish to see her languish in solitary confinement, as reported by her attorney. On Tuesday, Peters reportedly expressed to her lawyer, “They want me to die here,” following the denial of her request for release during her appeal process, as decided by a federal magistrate judge on Monday.

“I think I’m going to die here,” Peter Ticktin, her attorney, recounted during a conversation with Law&Crime. “She’s feeling defeated and distressed,” Ticktin remarked. “This ruling is devastating.”

The Florida-based attorney spoke to Peters, who has limited “human contact” restricted to calls between 9 a.m. and 11 a.m. This conversation took place shortly after Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge Scott Varholak decided not to intervene in her state sentencing. As previously covered by Law&Crime, Peters was convicted of meddling with election equipment and misconduct by permitting unauthorized access to voting machine data in 2021.

Ticktin, who once studied alongside President Donald Trump and represented him in a failed lawsuit against Hillary Clinton over alleged 2016 election rigging, penned a letter urging Trump to explore options for pardoning Peters on her state convictions in Colorado. The Trump administration has indicated interest in examining possible involvement.

“The notion of a presidential pardon for state offenses hasn’t been addressed in court,” Ticktin wrote. “The crucial question is whether the framers intended for presidential pardon powers to extend to state offenses, or if it was limited to federal crimes.”

He continued, “Did they envision a singular federal authority or a collective of united states? At that time, the term ‘United Countries’ was used, and the President was vested with the power to pardon all crimes.”

Varholak’s order denying Peters’ release came Monday after the former Mesa County clerk filed a federal lawsuit asking to be let out of prison while her appeal is pending. The judge said that Peters, “without question,” raised important constitutional questions concerning whether the trial court improperly punished her more severely because of her protected First Amendment speech, but that doesn’t mean he can interfere.

“Because this question remains pending before Colorado courts, this Court must abstain from answering that question until after the Colorado courts have decided the issue,” Varholak explained. “Federal courts are prohibited from interfering with ongoing state criminal proceedings absent extraordinary or special circumstances.”

Varholak added, “It is undisputed that her direct appeal is pending.”

Ticktin told Law&Crime on Tuesday that Varholak failed to realize “how much harm he just caused” by rejecting Peters’ bid for her release.

“I don’t think he understands that there is, to use the words that he did, irreparable harm that is great and immediate,” Ticktin said. “He’s looking at the harm from not being able to speak, rather than the harm of being incarcerated.”

Taking aim at Colorado’s 21st Judicial District Judge Matthew Barrett, who sentenced Peters to nine years behind bars and reportedly blasted her as a “charlatan,” Ticktin said the “only reason she’s in prison is because Matt Barrett didn’t find she was a danger to society for physical reasons, he’s keeping her in prison because she’s dangerous for what she may say.”

Ticktin told Law&Crime, “In other words, there is no freedom of speech in America as long as judges take this kind of attitude.” He blasted Varholak’s decision as a “form of willful blindness” and said he didn’t look at the fact that she’s staying in prison, only that she can’t speak out on her case and other things.

Peters is currently in solitary confinement after complaining about her safety and the way she was treated by corrections officers. Ticktin wrote in his letter Sunday that Peters currently fears for her life, for both health reasons and things she’s endured behind bars, after being “attacked by other prisoners three times in different locations where guards had to pull inmates off of her,” per the letter.

“There is actually a safe unit where inmates who do not cause problems can be assigned,” Ticktin wrote. “She has applied to be put into that unit but was denied six times without a valid reason.”

Describing her current health, Ticktin told Law&Crime, “Her physical condition is growing worse. She’s unable to eat, because it’s just so depressing being in there. There’s a six-foot high window you can’t see out of. She’s thinking she’s going to die there, and that they want her to die there. Why else would they put her in such a severe situation? People go mad in solitary, why would they do this?”

Ticktin added, “Being in the hole is designed as a punishment, it’s not designed to keep her safe.” He said Peters’ ultimate goal now is to be transferred to a “safer locked cell” or facility in Denver, where her case started out and where they don’t have “maximum security type of prisoners” that can harm or threaten her.

“It’s so easy to protect her, humanely, but instead they’re pretending to protect her,” Ticktin concluded. “By throwing her in the hole.”

The Colorado attorney general’s office did not respond to Law&Crime’s requests for comment on Tuesday.