by Matthew Holloway | Sep 5, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
On Tuesday, a judge considered the ongoing matter of Prop 140 in April Smith v. Fontes. The case involves a challenge of the validity of Arizona’s ranked choice voting initiative signatures.
At the end of the hearing, the number of challenged signatures was whittled down from over 40,000 to approximately 38,100 to be reviewed by a special master appointed by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge FrankMoskowitz.
Court observers are questioning if the outcome of the case has already been determined in Moskowitz’s mind.
It was evident that there was confusion between the judge and counsels for the plaintiffs, the Make Elections Fair Arizona PAC, and the Arizona Secretary of State on how to determine whether signatures already eliminated by County authorities or the Secretary of State would be present in either the full number of signatures or in “extrapolations.” The extrapolations are created by multiplying a 5% sample by 20 under existing statute to create a “validity rate” that can be applied to the sum total of signatures.
The hearing seemed expressly focused on how much of the evidence of duplicate signatures the court should exclude from consideration, rather than as the Supreme Court directed in Mussi v. Fontes, to “determine whether the exhibits prove any duplicate signatures by clear and convincing evidence.”
Judge Moskowitz appeared more concerned with determining how many exhibits do not prove duplicate signatures, saying, “They’re done. It’s over. It doesn’t matter if the remaining 31,000 or whatever it is are in fact duplicates and maybe double counted, maybe not give ’em credit and say they weren’t double counted. If you can get 4,800 that were double counted, it’s over,” describing what he expects to see in a brief from Make Elections Fair PAC.
Attorney Daniel Arellano, representing Plaintiffs April Smith, Nira Lee, and Joshua Davidian pushed back against this notion saying, “First of all, I just to be clear, I mean these all sound like categorical arguments to me, which I think are precisely what the Supreme Court said not to do. I’ve not seen briefing of this issue. There’s a preview of it. (…) I’ve not actually seen any legal argument on this, but as I listened to this argument here today, judge, I think, again, I forget if it’s Leah v. Hobbs or Leah v. Reagan, but one of the two definitely says that we get to invalidate signatures for reasons other than, in addition to, and outside of the 5% sample. And so if the premise of the committee’s argument is that it is, we have to go with what the county hasn’t validated because that is already multiplied times 20, and we can’t invalidate anything in addition to or separate from that. That is I think a proposition that the Supreme Court has squarely rejected.”
He added, “I think the point is I don’t think we can use this as an avenue to foreclose line by line review of the 38,000 signatures.”
But Judge Moskowitz was quick to retort: “No, I understand that. But even if I said yes, clear and convincing all 38,000, it says proceed accordingly. And my proceed accordingly is my next step is going to be how do I know of whatever number is of duplicates hasn’t been already invalidated. How do I know this signature hasn’t already been invalidated? And I think that would be in the proceed accordingly part of the Supreme Court’s order.”
However, the order from Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer made the court’s priority clear, “The trial court must continue with determining whether the initiative is supported by a sufficient number of qualified signatures. This determination should be made as expeditiously as possible to provide the parties and the public certainty.”
In a thread posted to X, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) paraphrased a comment from the organization’s President Scot Mussi, “This isn’t a debate about dubious matches or concerns of same family members with the same name being confused as a duplicate. All the duplicates submitted to be removed were exact name and address matches that aligned with what was on the voter file. Under state law, you are only allowed to sign a petition once, so they should have been removed. Instead, thousands of people were allowed to sign the initiative petition sheets multiple times, and those signatures were counted.”
In a press release the organization cited from the evidence presented that:
- When the Prop 140 Committee submitted their signatures to the Secretary of State, around 250 people had signed five or more times.
- One individual had signed 15 times.
- All those signatures were included in the final tabulation by the Arizona Secretary of State.
In a status update hearing held late on Wednesday, it was determined that Retired Arizona Superior Court Judge Christopher Skelly will lead the signature verification effort as court-appointed Special Master. During the meeting, Judge Moskowitz again referred to a possible stopping point for the signature review, asking Arellano, “Not to be looking at this for one side or the other, but there is a number of 4,800. And the only reason I say that number is because it’s the lowest number we’re talking about. But if that 4,800 number of duplicates is reached um… Does he stop if he knocks out whatever that number is 4,800 of duplicates? So you don’t get to your 33,000 something, something number Mr. Arellano? Does he just stop?”
Arellano, representing the plaintiffs, responded that the Special Master should be checking in with attorneys from both sides “periodically,” however, he added, “We’ve not set that up as any particular kind of benchmark. Nor do I know that we’d be comfortable doing so, since it sort of sets that up as like a goal of sorts.”
The signature checking effort is expected to run through September 16th with a hearing to discuss legal briefs from both sides on Friday.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 4, 2024 | Education, News
By Matthew Holloway |
Multiple sources have confirmed that two professors at Arizona State University, Dr. Angela Lober and Jenny Irish, spent an hour discussing with students “dismantling capitalism and electing a female president to restore reproductive rights.” They also asserted that, as Lober claimed, “the United States hates women and everything the female body does.”
The program in question: “Jenny Irish’s HATCH: A Speculative Future for Reproductive Rights,” was offered by the university through ASU Events on the website. The event was described as a workshop where, “Professor Irish will give a reading from Hatch, after which she’ll be joined in conversation by Dr. Angela Lober, Clinical Associate Professor and Director of the Academy of Lactation Programs at the Edson College of Nursing and Health Innovation. Come ready with your own questions and comments about the future of reproductive health in the face of climate change, misinformation, and other problems facing our present and our future.”
Hatch is a collection of prose poems from English Professor Jenny Irish. ASU described Hatch as, “This apocalyptic vision engages with the most pressing concerns of this contemporary sociopolitical moment: reproductive rights, climate crises, and mass extinction; gender and racial bias in healthcare and technology; disinformation, conspiracy theories, and pseudoscience; and the possibilities and dangers of artificial intelligence.”
The event, co-hosted by the Lincoln Center for Applied Ethics, took a decidedly apocalyptic turn according to College Fix, with Irish warning of a dystopian future for the United States complete with “cannibalism,” and “forced breeding camps.”
“So much of our reality points toward those futures,” she told attendees. Lober added, “The balance between hope and despair is an everyday experience for me.” She explained, “A couple years ago I never thought Roe v. Wade would be overturned. How could we possibly do that?”
Irish also made an ardent defense of transgenderism and claimed an “all-out assault on the trans community and people’s ability to self-identify,” exists in the U.S. She added, “It is disgusting, immoral, and wrong.” Per the Arizona Sun Times, the professors took about 15 questions via Zoom and when asked about the well-published decline in global birth rates, Lober said it doesn’t “bother” her, claiming “we are overpopulated.”
Coordinator of the ASU event, Karina Fitzgerald, told College Fix, the goal of the event was to “encourage students that are following creative pursuits or other types of worldbuilding to simply explore other elements that they haven’t thought of before in their writing, or other ways to challenge themselves in creative processes.” She described the “element of worldbuilding” for creating “fictional stories” as “a good exercise for students to get in the practice of.”
However, ASU Professor of Philosophy, Religious Studies, and Theology Dr. Owen Anderson offered a different perspective in a comment to AZ Free News. He starkly criticized his colleagues’ openly political statements that move beyond the “fictional stories.”
Dr. Anderson wrote, “ASU professors are not to use university resources to tell students how to vote in an election. Not only that, professors are to be examples of clear thinking. Instead, these professors are using cheap scare tactics and logical fallacies to try and influence students. It is a misuse of their position and creates an unfair power dynamic for students. When will ASU hold such professors accountable?”
The Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, Dr. Jonathan Turley, while noting the professors “have every right to espouse these views and it is good for students to have a wide variety of viewpoints on campus,” took note of the “hyperbolic rhetoric,” renewing his objection that conservative, moderate, and libertarian faculty have been purged from academia.
Specifically, Turley pointed to the staunchly one-sided, anti-capitalist nature of the event’s rhetoric writing, “The ASU event captures a rising call for dismantling an economic system that helped drive industrial innovation and massive wealth creation. It has also left great wealth disparities. We have sought to address poverty with social programs that offer greater opportunity for those who have not been able to escape cycles of poverty. We have much work to be done. However, the anti-capitalist movement often offers few specifics on the alternatives, as at the ASU event.”
He concluded, “This is a debate that should be welcomed but not in this type of one-sided, jingoistic presentation. Imagine how much more substantive this panel would have been with an alternative viewpoint. Let’s have a discussion on the merits of capitalism and the record of alternative systems. That would offer educational and not merely emotive benefits to our academic community.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 4, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Two Arizona sisters, identified as Enedina N., 72, and Ubaldina N., 82, have been found dead in a White Nissan Pathfinder riddled with bullets off the side of Mexican Federal Highway 2, approximately 21 miles south of the border community of Sonoyta.
The two women, one holding dual-U.S.-Mexican citizenship and the second a permanent resident, were reportedly on their way to Caborca, Sonora, their hometown.
According to a Friday statement posted to X from the Sonora Attorney General’s Office (Fiscalía de Sonora), “The incident was reported at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, August 23, when two lifeless women were reported, from Arizona and originally from Caborca, where they were headed, identified as Enedina ‘N,’ 72 years old, and Ubaldina ‘N,’ 82, inside a white Nissan Pathfinder vehicle, which had bullet impacts and had overturned at kilometer 221+500 of the aforementioned road.”
The authorities reported that investigators and from SEDENA and National Guard officers located a navy blue 2023 Ford F150, which had been reported stolen near the town of Quitovac, with “90 caliber 7.62×39 cartridges, three caliber 7.62×39 magazines, 22 rifle magazines, three ballistic vests and four AK-47 caliber 7.62×39 rifles.” The Mexican authorities noted that the “probable criminals” are still at large. According to Reuters, the particular stretch of Federal Highway 2, “is infamous for violence and the trafficking of migrants searching for better opportunities and security in the United States.”
Prosecutors for the Sonora AG’s Office said, “Security forces from three levels of government immediately initiated an operation to locate and arrest the criminal group responsible, with the support of specialized air and ground forces.” The Biden-Harris Administration’s Department of State told USA Today through a spokesman that U.S. authorities “are closely monitoring the situation.” The spokesman told the outlet, “We extend our deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of the deceased. We have no further comment at this time.”
Arizona outlet 12News reportedly spoke to the son of one of the victims on condition of anonymity Friday evening. He revealed that not only had his mother and aunt perished in the horrific attack, but their third sister had also recently perished from cancer. “My mother and my aunt were taken away violently from us,” he told reporters. “They were great people… they were great, loving grandmothers who loved to help their family and their community.”
The son told 12News that his mother and aunt lived in Phoenix but also owned homes in Mexico and would travel back and forth to visit family and vacation.
“This was so tragic, so shocking, that somebody like my mom and my aunt would be victims of such a crime,” he added. “Because they were just completely innocent people who just happened to travel the area.”
The son provided additional details of the sisters’ horrific deaths. He explained that his mother, who had been driving, was apparently shot in the head while the vehicle was moving at a high speed and died instantly, while his aunt was fatally injured when the vehicle left the road and rolled several times dying trapped in the wreck.
“This is tragic. Graphic. It just tears at the heart,” he said. “And not a single family member has received any information other than what they’ve actually seen on the news, and that’s also a tragic part of the story.”
He also told reporters, “Nobody has told us what is going on with the ongoing investigation. We don’t know anything about the investigation. They haven’t told us any arrests or any leads.”
The son said he feels that the brutal murder was a case of “wrong place, wrong time,” with the outlet noting that the attack took place in broad daylight, and the sisters appeared to be following guidelines given to U.S. tourists traveling in Mexico.
The son lamented, “The crime that is happening there, what happened to my mother and my aunt… it’s just not a recent thing, this has been going on for decades.” He continued, “There’s been a war on drugs since I was a little kid… I’ve heard it a million times. But it’s still going on. It’s still killing innocent people. It’s still killing grandmas. It’s devastating to the community, to the surviving members, and we don’t have an answer.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 2, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
In a letter sent on August 15th, the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC Foundation, told Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Attorney General Kris Mayes that they wish to conduct conversations with both of them to establish guidelines for volunteers to monitor ballot drop boxes for the 2024 election. The reception to the overture from CPAC Chairman Matt Schlapp and Vice Chairman Bill Walton was described as “frosty” by AZCentral on Friday.
In the letter from CPAC, Schlapp and Walton wrote, “The purpose of our letter is not to relitigate the 2020 elections. Rather we hope to work with you to reduce voter concerns regarding election fraud and the fair and transparent administration of elections.”
They added, “The goal is to establish standards for drop box observation that our organization as well as any other interested parties on the right or left, can rely upon and reassure the public in Arizona that drop boxes are not being fraudulently used.”
“Failure to do so risks that the results of the November elections will be questioned by those who did not support the winning candidate,” they warned.
As AZCentral reports, the response from Mayes and Fontes, both Democrats and both controversially involved in the 2020 and 2022 contested elections, was unmistakably negative. The outlet reported that the two elected officials claimed the CPAC letter was not sent in good faith and accused CPAC of fueling public skepticism in the security of Arizona’s elections.
Aaron Thacker, communications director for the Fontes, told reporters, “To come out and pretend like you recognize the problem and that you want to help is so disingenuous when you’re a part of the problem.” Thacker even added that CPAC should have started by asking for forgiveness from the Democrats saying, “They need to lead with a mea culpa, not pointing fingers.”
In a statement to the Arizona Republic, Mayes indicated she would be open to working with CPAC, provided that the group made a statement conceding the Democrat talking point that it is an “indisputable fact” that the 2020 and 2022 elections in Arizona were fairly conducted.
She further indicated that she would not allow CPAC to utilize open-source data to verify the identity of people ballot monitors suspect of committing voter fraud. “I want to be extremely clear that I will not stand for any voter intimidation, and that includes using ‘open-source’ information to identify individuals using a drop box to vote,” she told AZCentral.
Schlapp explained CPAC’s objectives in a reply to inquiries from The Washington Post via X on August 22nd:
“With the election less than 90 days away, we have reached out to state officials in both parties. Our goal is to ensure voters have confidence in the fairness in the system. That means the voting procedures must be transparent, with checks and balances in place so that Americans can have great confidence in the actual winner.
As a part of this process, we have identified unmonitored boxes as one area that undermines people’s faith in fair elections. Hence, we have been planning on a program like this for an extended period of time for states that have failed to establish robust protocols for monitoring drop boxes. Unfortunately, many states still have not detailed a clear, transparent and effective process to address the vulnerabilities of unmonitored drop boxes.”
Speaking to WaPo, Fontes claimed, “The whole thing is an absurd sham to cover up direct efforts to intimidate voters by a bunch of CPAC-recruited vigilantes to intimidate voters — and we absolutely will not be cooperating with them.”
Schlapp concluded, “We hope every person who has a lawful right to vote will have confidence their vote will be counted and protected. Every illegitimate vote – unlawful for a myriad of reasons including voting more than once, voting by those in the U.S. illegally, or votes of deceased persons somehow making it to the ballot box – violates the principle of one person, one legal vote. CPAC is committed to playing a responsible role in making certain all legal citizens have the chance to vote — no matter who they want to vote for – and have it count equally.”
As previously reported by AZ Free News, Democrats have expressed concerns after the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) prevailed in court with Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Jennifer Ryan-Touhill ruling the 2023 Elections Procedures Manual unconstitutional. The ruling has effectively cleared the way for CPAC’s monitoring efforts, constrained only by the existing 75ft. exclusion area in Arizona statute.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Matthew Holloway | Sep 2, 2024 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
On Wednesday, U.S. Senators Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema heaped praise on the Biden-Harris Administration for the nomination of Sharad Desai as a U.S. District Court judge.
Sharad is the brother of a sitting 9th Circuit Court Judge, Roopali Desai.
Sharad, Vice President and General Counsel for defense contractor Honeywell, worked as a civil litigator for Arizona law firm Osborn Maledon. At Honeywell, he focused on IT, Digital, and Strategic matters as well as Supply Chain and Electronic Solutions, according to his LinkedIn profile. Prior to his civil practice he worked as a law clerk for now-retired Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch during her 13-year tenure as Vice Chief Justice.
In a joint press release, Sinema said, “Sharad Desai possesses the experience, integrity, and intellect to serve as a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. I’m proud to have recommended his nomination to the White House and I look forward to securing his bipartisan confirmation by the United States Senate.”
Kelly added, “The President has nominated Mr. Desai, who is experienced and well-regarded by Arizona’s legal community, to serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.” He added, “I congratulate him on this important nomination and look forward to working towards his confirmation in the United States Senate.”
As reported by Reuters, Sharad was in attendance at his sister’s confirmation hearing where she told the Senate Judiciary Committee that her brother and sister, who is an Arizona law professor, are her “biggest cheerleaders.” The outlet also noted that Roopali Desai was an election lawyer prior to her appointment and has worked for Sen. Sinema’s political campaigns.
While both Desais are highly experienced attorneys with impressive qualifications, the political significance of Roopali Desai’s work in recent years cannot be overstated, or overlooked. And whether the political efforts of then-counselor Desai influenced the nomination of one or both of them will very likely play into Sharad Desai’s confirmation hearing, along with any potential nominations that University of Arizona Law Professor Shefali Milczarek-Desai might see in the future.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
