Reports have emerged that voters may have had their registration addresses moved by Arizona’s Motor Vehicles Division (MVD) without their consent, potentially jeopardizing their ability to vote.
Such unintended disenfranchisement occurred for thousands of voters in the 2022 midterm election.
The renewed concern for the eligibility of an untold number of legal voters emerged after GOP congressional candidate Abraham Hamadeh’s counsel, Jen Wright, brought up their discovery from earlier this year that the MVD moved the voter registration address for thousands of voters without their consent.
🚨ATTN: ARIZONA VOTERS🚨
In @AbrahamHamadeh’s case we found THOUSANDS of voters’ registration address was moved based on ANY interaction with MVD.
CHECK YOUR REGISTRATION NOW TO CONFIRM YOU ARE REGISTERED AT YOUR CURRENT, PRIMARY RESIDENCE.https://t.co/So7VKN545E
Wright was referencing the Hamadeh v. Mayes case, which the Arizona Court of Appeals decided in April.
In that case, Hamadeh’s counsel explained that they discovered voters who owned other properties in addition to their primary residence and found themselves disenfranchised.
“[A]fter interviewing hundreds of those voters, we found that many are voters who have connections to properties outside of their home county; and due to no fault of their own, but instead changes to the statewide computer system, their registration was moved from their county of residence to the county where they had some connection without the voter’s express knowledge, consent or intent in a way that lacks a requisite procedural due process requirement necessitated before depriving someone of their sacred right to vote,” stated counsel. “[I]t appears that more than 1,100 election day provisional voters were, we believe, wrongly disenfranchised. Turns out, with many of these declarations we have their voting record and history, and we can see when and how it was changed, and it was not by their own intent; and we know their intent because they did not show up to vote in the secondary county that was assigned to them.”
The MVD process that impacted those 1,100 voters went into place in April 2020. The court of appeals said that those Arizonans’ votes still couldn’t count since their registrations reflected an address outside the precinct they attempted to vote in, regardless of the change being made by MVD without the knowledge or consent of the voters.
“[E]ven if voters cast provisional ballots in the wrong precinct because of the alleged faulty but unchallenged election procedure, the voters still were not registered to vote in the precincts where they cast those provisional ballots,” stated the court. “Arizona law simply does not authorize opening the envelopes and counting those ballots.”
This hasn’t been the only case recently in which MVD interactions jeopardized Arizonans’ right to vote.
Last month, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that nearly 100,000 longtime Arizona voters caught up in an MVD coding error were allowed to vote, despite a challenge from Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, who put the blame on voters and asked that they be limited to voting a federal ballot only.
The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that those voters were eligible to vote. Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer ruled that the fault was with the state, not the voters, for their registration changing.
“[A] state administrative failure permitted the Affected Voters to be registered without confirming that they provided DPOC when they received their driver’s licenses and where there is so little time remaining before the beginning of the 2024 General Election,” said Timmer.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer and State Senator Ken Bennett filed amicus briefs in defense of a Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) ballot initiative with the Arizona Supreme Court last week.
Bennett served as the secretary of state from 2009 to 2015. He filed his brief jointly with Helen Purcell, the former Maricopa County recorder who served nearly 30 years.
Richer said in his filing for Smith v. Fontes that the votes should be counted for RCV, or Prop 140, the “Make Elections Fair Act” — regardless of the existence of a disqualifying number of duplicate signatures gathered — because the “election has already begun” and, he says, state law prohibits the prevention of counting votes cast.
“Hiding the results or attempting to prevent the vote from being tabulated is an inequitable result,” said Richer. “And it is at odds with Arizona public policy that demands government transparency. Not counting the vote does not mean it did not happen.”
Richer said all arguments concerning the initiative’s qualifications to be on the ballot were rendered moot after the deadline passed to certify and print the ballots.
“To be resolved with a high degree of certainty may not be currently possible given the election time constraints,” said Richer. “The issue has now, at least partially, gone to the people. The Recorder believes there is benefit to allowing the vote to occur, and assuming it is otherwise constitutional, to count.”
Richer stated that his office had already printed over 21,500 different ballot styles and mailed many of them out to in-state residents as well as military and overseas voters, some of which have been returned: over 1,100 out of about 8,500.
“Recorder submits that once the ballots are printed, the time for signature challenges must end,” said Richer.
Richer also said that state law prohibits the destruction of any public record of a vote, and that Maricopa County’s tabulation machines would tabulate the votes returned.
The recorder noted that state law does allow for courts to enjoin the certification and printing of ballots, but not the power to enjoin the counting of votes.
“[I]f the voting tally is a public record, the Recorder does not see how Maricopa County can either destroy it or fail to release it,” said Richer.
Similarly, Bennett and Purcell argued that their combined expertise on elections made it clear that timeliness in elections takes precedence over validity.
Bennett and Purcell cited court precedent in their argument of mootness regarding the challenge to Prop 140’s validity. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes instructed county election officials to include Prop 140 on their ballots printed in late August.
“Courts have consistently upheld the principle that pre-election challenges must be resolved before the ballot printing deadline,” said the pair. “[And] as a practical matter, invalidating Prop 140 after voting has already begun would result in electoral chaos and damage voter confidence in the efficacy of their votes.”
That ballot printing deadline occurred a day after the Arizona Supreme Court remanded the case to the Maricopa County Superior Court for review, citing the exclusion of evidence pertaining to 40,000 duplicate signatures. The exclusion of those contested signatures reduce petition signatures to what is below the total required to qualify for the ballot.
Though the Maricopa County Superior Court did find that nearly all of the 40,000 signatures were duplicates, the court ruled that the state constitution didn’t allow for those votes cast on Prop 140 to be ignored. That ruling led to the appeal which the Arizona Supreme Court now considers, and with which Richer and Bennett disagree.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne issued a statement of support for a lawsuit challenging Attorney General Kris Mayes’ restrictions on the state’s school choice program.
Horne said that he maintains concerns that Mayes will demand the return of Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) funds from families based on her interpretation of the laws governing allowable expenses.
In July, Mayes advised the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) that, per her interpretation of the law, parents should no longer be reimbursed for supplementary educational materials not expressly outlined in curriculum.
Though Mayes acknowledged that the statute on which she based her interpretation didn’t offer a definition of “supplemental materials,” she argued in her letter to Associate Superintendent John Ward that the State Board of Education’s definition of the term should apply: “relevant materials directly related to the course of study for which they are being used that introduce content and instructional strategies or that enhance, complement, enrich, extend or support the curriculum.”
Mayes’ application of this definition requires explicit mention of all supplies required within a curriculum: even things like pencils and erasers. The ADE handbook doesn’t require documentation of items “generally known to be educational” in their purpose, such as pencils and erasers.
The attorney general directed Ward to provide documentation of total supplementary material expenditure from 2019 to present, as well as funds spent on curriculum materials without curriculum documentation and approved textbooks lacking proof of requirement by a qualified school or eligible postsecondary institution.
In response to Mayes’ directive, the Goldwater Institute sued on behalf of ESA mothers Velia Aguirre and Rosemary McAtee. The two mothers homeschool their children: Aguirre homeschools all three of her children, while McAtee homeschools seven of her nine children.
In their argument, the Goldwater Institute argued that Mayes’ directive was not only in violation of the law, it was a jeopardy to the existing backlog of tens of thousands of purchase orders — an issue that would inherently impact the education of many children relying on those ESA funds.
The Goldwater Institute also pointed out in a press release that not even public and private school curriculums necessarily list supplementary items such as pencils and erasers.
In a statement, Horne expressed hope that the Goldwater Institute would prevail in its lawsuit.
“The Department of Education concedes the argument of the Goldwater Institute. When this issue first arose in July, my concern was that the Attorney General could force Empowerment Scholarship Account holders to return funds if they did not comply with her office’s interpretation of the law. This lawsuit will settle the issue in court and my sincere hope is that the arguments made by Goldwater will prevail.”
Horne had issued an anticipatory show of support for a hypothetical lawsuit from the Goldwater Institute in a response on the ADE page for ESAs immediately following Mayes’ letter. Horne clarified that a prior court decision bound ADE from having the standing to file lawsuits.
The superintendent said that he doesn’t agree with Mayes’ interpretation that supplementary materials are required to be tied to curriculum. However, Horne said that Mayes’ directive was one his department advised him that he couldn’t challenge and win.
As of Monday, over 78,600 students were enrolled in the ESA Program.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The nation’s largest university is balking its years-long trend of growth and expansion with the closure of one of its campuses.
Arizona State University (ASU) announced earlier this week that it will close its Lake Havasu campus in the summer 2025, affecting over 200 students and 20 faculty members. The Lake Havasu campus opened just over a decade ago in 2012.
The university will also be increasing tuition for those on campus: full-time students will pay another $350, with part-time students to pay a lower, “proportional” amount.
ASU blamed state budget cuts for the campus closure in its Monday announcement, citing an $11 million reduction in funding. ASU President Michael Crow said this latest reduction was part of a longtime refusal by the state legislature and governor to fund higher education adequately.
“These necessary actions reflect the continuing lack of public investment from state government for higher education in Arizona,’’ said Crow. “ASU simply cannot be asked to fund the expansion of higher education across the state without state investment as a part of the financial structure to do so. These budget cuts put the state of Arizona even further behind in ensuring that Arizona has the talent and workforce necessary to advance its economy.”
Governor Katie Hobbs — often at odds with the slim Republican majority of the state legislature — was supportive of this most recent budget, including the cuts to higher education and nearly all other agencies.
“[T]his bipartisan, balanced budget puts our state on solid financial ground,” said Hobbs at the time.
A spokesperson for Hobbs told outlets that the governor remains supportive of the budget, but didn’t elaborate whether the governor was supportive of ASU’s decision.
However, lawmakers have refuted this claim. House Majority Leader Leo Biasiucci, who resides in Lake Havasu City, issued a joint statement with Republican State Rep. John Gillette expressing disappointment with ASU’s decision and concern for the lack of public discussion or stakeholder involvement.
“ASU’s strong financial health simply does not justify its action. The State Legislature has made significant investments in ASU over the past few years,” said the lawmakers. “ASU’s budget has increased by 22 percent since FY20, and by 40 percent since 2015, with $408 million allocated to the university this year, reflecting our commitment to higher education, even while difficult decisions were made to balance the budget.”
Gillette also added the speculation in a separate post of his own that ASU’s decision was politically motivated.
“When times are good, it will receive new funds; when times are tough, it should tighten its belt — just like every other agency that serves the public,” said Gillette. “We call on ASU to immediately reconsider this closure and urge the Arizona Board of Regents to take a much closer look at this decision as it looks very politically motivated this close to the election.”
We are deeply troubled by ASU’s surprise decision to close the Lake Havasu campus,even more frustrating is that ASU’s financial standing clearly doesn’t justify such drastic action. The legislature prioritized higher education with significant investments in ASU over the past…
According to Lake Havasu City leadership, ASU kept the city out of their decision to close the campus. It was members of the community and city leadership that served on the committee that brought ASU to the city over a decade ago.
Mayor Cal Sheehy toldHavasu News the city wasn’t given the opportunity to seek an alternative to closing the campus.
“It’s really sad that ASU has made the decision to close the college at Lake Havasu City, but the real challenge is that we haven’t had a chance to discuss any alternatives,” said Sheehy. “They believe the legislature put them here, but Lake Havasu has shown we are innovative, starting with the $2 million it took to get it here in the first place, and a conversation about what solutions could be there and what the opportunities are.”
One of the committee members, business owner Steve Greeley, also didn’t buy ASU’s claim that financial woes had forced their hand.
“I saw the quote by President Crow in regards to the Legislature cutting back on funding. I understand that, but you would think they would have a workaround before making a decision so burdensome,” said Greeley. “It was a huge effort by the community all those years ago, that took a lot of time, resources and money. I’m hoping something can be resolved.”
Havasu News editorial staff reported that their community raised $2 million in an effort to assist ASU in coming to their city.
“Our community deserved a seat at the table,” said the outlet. “We should be angry about this. The closure will affect students, families, and local jobs. And ASU’s promise to relocate students doesn’t make up for the loss of a school that became a part of our town. ASU has broken its promise to Lake Havasu City, and they owe us more than a simple goodbye.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Climate activists are crowdfunding bail to free those arrested for trespassing a Phoenix campaign field office for Donald Trump on Monday.
The activists were with the Sunrise Movement, a national organization dedicated to initiating a “climate revolution” by popularizing and implementing the Green New Deal. Among those arrested were out-of-state activists: 20-year-old Nate Scofield and 21-year-old Riya Kumar.
Scofield is a University of North Carolina student and substitute teacher for the Central Park School for Children in Durham, North Carolina. Scofield serves as a campus organizer and hub delegate with the Sunrise Movement.
Kumar is a University of Idaho student; she posted asking for bail money after her arrest.
“I was arrested at a Trump office because I am fighting for a just and liveable future for all beings,” said Kumar.
Must-watch video of a Trump staffer responding to young people sitting in at Trump's Phoenix campaign office to protest his loyalty to the oil billionaires destroying our planet.
An organizer for Monday’s event and founder of the Sunrise Movement’s Phoenix hub, 17-year-old Ashton Dolce, participates in FEMA’s Youth Preparedness Council and attends BASIS Scottsdale.
As of this report, nearly 200 individuals have contributed over $7,000 of the $10,000 goal. Simren Kaur, a California-based activist and farming nonprofit coordinator, organized the fundraiser.
“A Donald Trump Presidency would put us in danger. He will do the bidding of Big Oil, revoke protections for millions of immigrants, and take away access to abortion and gender-affirming care for people in red states,” read the GoFundMe page. “Trump is radical and extreme right-wing Republicans have detailed plans to strip our rights away. That is why these young activists took the sacrifice of risking arrest to expose Trump for who he is, and fight for a livable future for all of us.”
The Green New Deal, like its namesake instituted by former President Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression, seeks to completely overhaul American society through public programs and projects. Unlike the New Deal’s focus on job creation, however, the Green New Deal focuses on power: 100 percent replacement of current energy sources with “clean,” or “green,” renewables supported by “green” jobs and crackdowns on emissions.
Donors include Dhakshinamurthy Suppusamy, Hannah Amick, Mazie Drummond, Xiuhua Miao, Sage Clausen, Michael Koob, Dana Johnson, Evan Blue, Honora Wolfe, Sean Cohen, Danielle Mayahi, Daniel Warner, Arabella Garcia, Emilia Anders, Bryan Chu, Ellen Tucker, Yoram Tereleth, Emma Ramalingam, Rebekah MillerMacPhee, Josie Cohen-Rodriguez, Eva Cohen, Maelynn Oudjit, Mars Cantrell, MacKenzie Mae MacFarland, Rebecca Davis, Kai Uehara, Mary Collier, Aaryaman Singhal, Jenifer Miller, Keanu Arpels-Josiah, Lilian Montagne, Abigail McIver, Maddie Goldstein, Parker Abell, Brian Giacoppo, Lynn Handlin, Markus Ceniceros, Chloe Qin, Simon Aron, Dylan Mitlehner, Stacy Steinberg, Nicole Green, Sean Haskett, Ariela Lara, Pamela McInnes, Maia Cuddy, Logan Madden, Mayuri Nagpal, Richard Cho, Isabel Marlens, Violet Pearcy, Sarah Shahinpour, Lisa Hyman, Kiersten Hackman, Rose Cheyette, Celestina Garcia, Carla Diehl, Jessy Lloyd, Kaitlin White, Aum Davé, Stacy Miller, Sarah Borokowski, Olivia Campbell, Leontina Hormel, Ian Gentry, Mary King, Kailee Ford, Yeishka Montalvo, Christina King, Christian Keeve, Paola Sanchez, Katerina Leedy, George Bergan, Robert Accardo, Derek Miranda, Alexander Tinker, Patrick Harper, Leif Running, Jessica Barranco, Jacob W. Apenes, Julie Volpenhein, Lindsay Volpenhein, Luis Mirianda, Sarah Shahinpour, Caroline Lindy, Vianni Ledesma, Ashna Shah, Yesenia Garza, CJ Janssen, Caitlyn Carpenter, Tasia North, John Ramos, Avi Horwitz, Adina Gitomer, Audrey M., Hugo Aponte, Jeremy Liskar, Joseph Markus, Harita Iswara, Yong Zhou, Alisa Bennett, Jacob Glass, Indigo Lemke, Victoria Garcia, Genna Kieper, Eric Fishman, Adah Crandall, Jennifer Pierce, Mekala Kumar, Katherine Campion, Thomas Blackwell, Yara Levin, Terri Pickens, Aly Bean, Lillian Saperston, Ajit Rajbhandari, Michael Field, Abraham Layon, Jordan Reif, John Paul Mejia, Ian Sippel, Rosemary McInnes, Ryan Dickey, Laela Zaidi, Ling Xiong, Hannah Hayes, Ella Weber, Paul Campion, Adin Alem, Alyssa Harrison, Victoria Plant, Anton Cedergrund, Sawyer Pappas, Dylan Mitlehner, and Shiva Rajbhandari.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
