Elijah Norton - lying to Voters about Nick’s Record.
October 2, 2026
Via Email
Friends of Elijah Norton
c/o Elijah Norton
RE: Cease and Desist
Dear Mr. Norton:
This firm represents Mansour for Arizona and Nick Mansour. We have become aware of your campaign’s recently published communications that attack Nick’s character, including a website, video ad, and social media post published by you or your campaign, as well as a mail ad published by the Arizona Republican Party with your authorization. Each of these communications contains patently false and injurious representations about Nick and his professional history. We demand that you take down these defamatory communications immediately. Otherwise, we will be forced to pursue all available legal remedies to ensure that truth prevails over the baseless rumors you have spread at Nick’s expense.
In summary, your campaign has published a series of false statements about Nick across your campaign website, video advertising, direct mail, and social media. Among other things:
Nick Mansour was never fined $11.4 million for Medicare fraud. Nick was never a party to the proceeding your campaign cites, and no fine or judgment was entered against him.
Nick Mansour was not “sued over missing COVID relief funds.” Your campaign's own source documents show that Nick was not a defendant in the lawsuit and is not referenced in the complaint.
Nick Mansour did not “pocket tax dollars meant for students.” There is no evidence that Nick received or misappropriated federal relief funds intended for students.
Arizona College of Nursing did not have a 21% student loan default rate during the relevant period. U.S. Department of Education data show a default rate of 2.6%.
These are not merely differences of opinion or rhetorical political attacks. They are specific assertions of fact capable of being proven true or false. Several are contradicted by the very records your campaign relies upon and has posted on its own website.
Your statements are defamation under Arizona law.
Under Arizona law, false statements are defamatory when the publication “bring[s] the defamed person into disrepute, contempt, ridicule” or impeaches their “honesty, integrity, virtue, or reputation.” Harris v. Warner in and for the County of Maricopa, 255 Ariz. 29, 32 ¶ 11 (2023) (quoting Turner v. Devlin, 174 Ariz. 201, 203-04 (1993)). And while there may be room in political discourse for rhetorical hyperbole, when a statement about an individual (even a candidate for public office) purports to be objective fact but is demonstrably false and uttered with reckless disregard for the truth, it rises to the level of defamation. See Heuisler v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 168 Ariz. 278, 282 (App. 1991); see also Harris, 255 Ariz. ¶ 13 (“in deciding whether a statement is actionable, the key inquiry is whether the challenged expression . . . would reasonably appear to state or imply assertions of objective fact”).
In an attempt to damage your political opponent, you have made objectively false assertions of fact, apparently with reckless disregard for the truth and without any effort to verify your claims against the public records posted on your own website. You cannot plausibly claim that you did not know these statements to be false, and yet you published them anyway. Accordingly, the website, X post, video, and mailer all rise to the level of defamation for which we may pursue legal recourse if you do not remedy your false statements by removing them and preventing their further dissemination.
Below, we address just a handful of the defamatory statements you have made about Nick to date. These falsehoods alone are reason enough to take down your communications and refrain from further publication on these topics.
Nick was never sued or fined.
On September 30, 2026, you published to your X profile that Nick “took advantage of nursing students, had his nursing college put on probation, [was] sued multiple times, and fined $11.4 million for Medicare fraud.” The video ad accompanying your post and your attack website regurgitate these claims. But they are demonstrably false.
First, your allegations related to Medicare fraud appear to reference Nick’s time at Pacific Pulmonary Services, where he was a VP for less than one year. To say Nick or “his company” were involved in any action related to alleged Medicare fraud is false—Nick was once an employee at the company but did not control it. Further, Nick was not employed at PPS during any events that may have given rise to any investigation or ensuing settlement. He had departed PPS months before the events giving rise to a whistleblower complaint—one which, tellingly, does not mention Nick at all.
Second, to describe Nick as having been “fined $11.4 million,” as your website does, is patently false. Nick was never party to any proceeding that resulted in a fine or judgment. Indeed, the proceeding that you appear to reference, between PPS and multiple parties, resulted in a voluntary settlement—not a fine. Regardless, any such proceeding and the events giving rise to it occurred entirely after Nick left his limited role at the company. Attempting to attribute a “fine” to Nick or any entity over which he exercised control is wildly misleading.
Finally, your communications go on to claim that Nick was “sued multiple times,” which is another falsehood. Your mail ad even goes so far as to say, “Mansour sued over missing COVID relief funds.” But court documents on your own website contain the truth—namely, that the lawsuit you point to did not name Nick as a defendant or reference him at all. To ignore this fact in an effort to smear Nick’s reputation shows reckless disregard for the truth.
Nick did not “pocket” tax dollars or “scam” any students.
Based again on the lawsuit to which Nick was not a party, your video ad says Nick “ran a for-profit nursing school scam” and accuses him of “pocketing tax dollars meant for students.” This is, again, a blatant lie. Arizona College of Nursing received federal relief funds under the CARES Act for emergency grants to students and made the funds readily available for that purpose, resulting in grants to thousands of students. And there is no evidence that Nick “pocketed” any funds. This statement, which implies that Nick misappropriated (or even stole) federal funds, rises to the level of defamation per se under Arizona law. See Boswell v. Phoenix Newspapers, 152 Ariz. 1, 6 n. 4 (App. 1985) (“Slander per se in Arizona are . . . accusations which tend to injure a person in his or her profession, trade or business; or statements that impute the commission of a crime involving moral turpitude”).
In a further attempt to prove the false statement that Nick “scammed” students, your website reports a demonstrably false statistic that “21% of his Tempe students [at Arizona College of Nursing] defaulted on their student loans vs.” a “2% national default rate.” During the relevant time period, the U.S. Department of Education tracked defaults and found that for borrowers who entered repayment from October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019 the real default rate for Arizona College of Nursing was 2.6%, in keeping with the national average.
You must immediately remove defamatory content from your campaign communications.
Your social media post, video, and website all contain defamatory statements about Nick and his background. The same is true of the mail ad published by the Arizona Republican Party. This letter constitutes formal notice of the falsity of the statements you have made or authorized the Republican Party to make.
Therefore, we demand that you immediately remove any of the website, digital, and social media content discussed in the foregoing, as well as any other content that you reasonably know to be false. Further, we demand that, in the future, you refrain from making such unsubstantiated and defamatory claims or authorizing the Republican Party to make such claims. Should you fail to comply, Nick reserves the right to pursue any and all legal remedies to protect his reputation from your unfounded attacks.
Sincerely,
Jillian Andrews