By Ethan Faverino |

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge has ruled that Secretary of State Adrian Fontes’ proposed ballot language for Proposition 145 violates Arizona law, blocking Fontes from using the language on the November ballot.

The ruling came in a lawsuit filed by Arizona House Speaker Steve Montenegro (R-LD29) and Senate President Warren Petersen (R-LD14), who challenged the ballot language for the proposed constitutional amendment concerning Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESA) for children of military families.

Montenegro and Petersen alleged that Fontes’ proposed language improperly characterized Proposition 145 by informing voters that approving the measure would also nullify Proposition 212, a separate ballot initiative that would make changes to Arizona’s ESA program.

Petersen and Montenegro sought an injunction preventing Fontes from using the proposed descriptive title and “yes/no” language on the official ballot.

Fontes’ proposed language stated that a “yes” vote would amend the Arizona Constitution to “nullify Proposition 212, which imposes spending and income limits” on ESAs.

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge David McDowell ruled that the language did not comply with A.R.S. § 19-125(D), which requires ballot descriptions to explain the effect a measure would have on existing law.

“The reference to Proposition 212 in the title and the ‘yes/no’ language is not a reference to existing law,” McDowell wrote in his ruling.

Because Proposition 212 is a proposed initiative that voters will consider in November, rather than an existing law, McDowell determined that Fontes could not include a reference to its potential nullification in the official ballot language for Proposition 145.

The court therefore enjoined the Secretary of State from using the proposed title and “yes/no” language for Proposition 145 on the official ballot.

Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.