A judge in Mohave County is expected to rule by noon on Monday whether Arizonans could lose their ability to vote by mail without providing an excuse.
Judge Lee Jantzen is being asked by the Arizona Republican Party and its chair, Kelli Ward, to declare the state’s no-excuse voting by mail “system” unconstitutional despite the fact the system has been in effect for three decades. The judge heard arguments last Friday to issue a preliminary injunction to ban no-excuse voting by mail effective with the upcoming Nov. 8 General Election.
About 85 percent of all ballots cast in the 2020 General Election—including Ward’s ballot—were mailed out to voters in advance of the election. But the AZGOP contends the law passed by the Legislature in 1991 violates the constitutional requirement that Arizona’s elections be held in such a way to ensure “secrecy in voting.”
The lawsuit argues the only ballots which should be accepted through the mail are those from voters who provide a satisfactory excuse—such as military service, a disability that makes it a burden to vote in person, or being out of town on Election Day.
(The AZGOP acknowledged in their May 17 lawsuit that there is not enough time to outlaw no-excuse voting for the Aug. 2 Primary Election as ballots are in the process of being printed so they can be in voters’ mailboxes in early July.).
Attorneys for Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs and several county election officials argued to Jantzen that there is nothing unconstitutional with Arizona’s no-excuse voting by mail system. They also advised the judge of the practical problems with trying to ban a practice after 30 years without much advance notice to voters and those responsible for running each county’s elections.
One such problem involves the Active Early Voter List, from which ballots are sent to voters who have signed up to receive them by mail. Those voters recently received a reminder notice from their respective county recorder with the 2022 election schedule and confirming the voters will receive ballots by mail for the primary and general elections.
The AZGOP argued to Jantzen that counties can be forced to accommodate changes in time for the General Election, even if it requires hiring thousands more poll workers and election staff across the state, scrounging to find enough voting machines and other election-related equipment, and locating facilities which can accommodate millions more in-person voters than have turned out in years.
That argument was pushed back on during Friday’s hearing by an attorney for seven of Arizona’s 15 county recorders responsible for the voting by mail process and county election directors who are responsible for election day voting and ballot tabulation.
“They cannot conjure polling places or poll workers out of nothing,” Karen Hartman-Tellez of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office told Jantzen.
Whatever order Jantzen issues in response to the AZGOP’s preliminary injunction request is likely to be appealed. But even if no-excuse voting by mail is allowed to take place this year, the AZGOP’s constitutional challenge does not die.
Instead, the litigation will move forward to a trial under civil court rules, same as any other lawsuit.
In his first veto of the 2022 legislative session, Gov. Doug Ducey unexpectedly shot down an election integrity bill introduced by Rep. Joseph Chaplik (R-Scottsdale) with overwhelming support of the House Republican caucus.
House Bill 2617 dealt with the removal of voters from each county’s voter rolls, focused on non-U.S. citizens and non-Arizona residents. But Ducey announced his veto in a letter to Senate President Karen Fann and House Speaker Rusty Bowers. on Friday.
“Our lawfully registered voters deserve to know that their right to vote will not be disturbed without sufficient due process,” Ducey wrote. “This provision leaves our election system vulnerable to bad actors who could seek to falsely allege a voter is not a qualified elector.”
Chaplik’s HB2617 mandated county recorders to remove voters from their rolls based on a “reason to believe” the voter is not a U.S. citizen or a resident of the county. Such removal could not occur until the end of a detailed process which ensured the voter in question had 90 days to present satisfactory evidence that the person is in fact qualified to vote in their registered county.
The bill also included new reporting requirements for all jury commissioners and the Arizona Department of Transportation to help identify people who may no longer be eligible to vote in a specific county or were never eligible to vote in Arizona.
However, Ducey’s veto letter pointed to several concerns with the legislation, including the level of proof threshold.
“The subjectivity of this provision, as well as a lack of guardrails against false claims, included in H.B. 2617 leaves voter registration susceptible to being canceled based on fiction rather than fact,” Ducey wrote to Fann and Bowers.
But Ducey’s criticisms did not sit well with supporters who saw Chaplik’s bill as a much needed and long overdue opportunity to establish confidence in the legitimacy of Arizona’s voter rolls.
AZGOP chair Kelli Ward called Ducey’s move “unAmerican” while Rep. Jacqueline Parker (R-Mesa) tweeted that the governor “apparently wants dead people to be able to vote again.”
Sam Stone, former Phoenix city staffer and current city council candidate, was “hugely disappointed” in Ducey’s veto and questioned the governor’s motives.
“Cleaning up our voter rolls is essential to secure elections,” Stone tweeted. “There is not one legitimate reason to leave people who have died or moved on our voter rolls, especially with automatic vote-by-mail.
Stone further suggested “the only reason to leave people who have died or moved on our voter rolls” is to commit voter fraud.
Ducey’s veto brought forth a more detailed rebuke from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC).
“Contrary to what is stated in the veto letter, #HB2617 provides ample safeguards to ensure eligible voters do not have their registrations improperly cancelled,” AFEC tweeted after the veto was announced. “In fact, the bill stipulates that counties must confirm that the voter is ineligible, then requires the county to send a notice to the voter.”
It is only after the registered voter fails to respond to the notice within 90 days that the registration would be cancelled, AFEC pointed out.
“A broad coalition of local and national election integrity leaders signed onto a letter urging Governor Ducey to sign HB2617, and explained in great detail the need for the enhanced voter roll maintenance requirements and the safeguards contained in the measure,” AFEC further tweeted.
The letter referred to by in the tweet was signed by AFEC President Scot Mussi along with representatives of Heritage Action for America, America First Policy Institute, Election Transparency Initiative, Honest Elections Project Action, FreedomWorks, Amax ACTION, and the Foundation for Government Accountability.
Ducey noted he would consider signing a new voter roll bill with revised language if Chaplik and the rest of the Legislature wants to consider his feedback.
FreedomWorks activist Merissa Hamilton is among those hopeful Chaplik will consider the governor’s criticisms and reintroduce a new version of HB2617 this session. She said a path to clean voter rolls is “needed to secure our Arizona elections.”
The announcement that a federal judge has temporarily blocked President Joe Biden and his administration from lifting a Title 42 public health order at the Mexico border on May 23 was welcomed news to the communities and law enforcement agencies still reeling from the ongoing influx of undocumented migrants which started after Biden was sworn in.
Federal officials admitted to Judge Robert Summerhays with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana that once Title 42 is fully lifted, the number of border crossings are expected to “increase significantly” to as many as 18,000 migrants each day. As a result, last Friday the judge granted a request by 21 states for a preliminary injunction which forces the White House to comply with various federal rules before making any more changes to Title 42 enforcement.
In March 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) under President Donald Trump invoked Title 42, which is part of the Public Health Services Act of 1944 aimed at preventing the spread of communicable diseases in the country. Title 42 allows federal officials to suspend the right to introduce migrants -including those seeking asylum- by sealing the land borders into the United States and expelling crossers back into Mexico or return them to their home countries.
Biden later loosened Title 42 to no longer apply to unaccompanied children or to certain migrants who can show a “significant law enforcement, officer and public safety, humanitarian, or public health” interest.
For the month of April 2022, only 42 percent of crossers were expelled under Title 42, according to a report issued by Rep. John Katko of New York. By then, the CDC had announced Title 42 would end May 23, to be replaced by unspecified plans to control COVID-19 in other ways.
Arizona is among the states named as plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which contends the end of Title 42 will bring “much greater numbers of paroled aliens with non-meritorious asylum claims who were induced to enter the United States because of the Termination Order.”
Summerhays was assigned the states’ lawsuit and issued a temporary restraining order against Biden, the CDC, and federal immigration officials to keep Title 42 in place until the legal challenge is complete.
Part of that challenge involves ensuring the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has a workable a plan ready to implement for border operations once Title 42 is lifted. The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) requires a public notice period, with sufficient time for comment, before the CDC’s Title 42 order can be ended. And there is a requirement that the CDC show its proposed change is not “arbitrary and capricious.”
The lawsuit contends keeping Title 42 in place until an APA-compliant plan is in place will prevent “an imminent, man-made, self-inflicted calamity: the abrupt elimination of the only safety valve preventing this administration’s disastrous border policies from devolving into an unmitigated catastrophe.”
Summerhays was asked to change the temporary order into a permanent injunction, which he considered last week. His May 20 ruling notes the states provided sufficient evidence to support their argument that the CDC’s announced termination of Title 42 will increase community and state costs for healthcare, education, and public safety as a result of “increased border crossings and that, based on the government’s estimates, the increase may be as high as three-fold.”
Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich called Summerhays’ ruling “a significant win,” and noted that maintaining Title 42 for now is vital.
“I’m grateful to the court for upholding the rule of law and helping maintain some level of sanity as we continue to battle the Biden-made border crisis,” Brnovich said.
In the meantime, U.S. Border Patrol Chief John Modlin of the Tucson Sector continues to tweet about the never-ending group of undocumented migrants and deadly fentanyl coming across the southwest border.
Modlin announced earlier this month that Tucson Sector agents hosted a binational training for immigration officers assigned to the Instituto Nacional de Migración. The training held at the Nogales Station included first aid and fentanyl exposure. It will enhance the handling of emergencies along the shared border, Modlin noted.
Modlin also recently hosted a delegation from Poland and the Baltic states to discuss border security best practices. And he shared information about that two large groups of had been encountered by USBP agents near Lukeville.
Those taken into custody were citizens of Brazil, Chile, Cuba, Guatemala, and Peru.
In one night, Ajo Station agents encountered two large groups near Lukeville, AZ.
Of the 119 migrants taken into custody, 95 were citizens of Cuba or Peru. The remainder of the group consisted of Brazilian, Guatemalan, and Chilean citizens. pic.twitter.com/S5FKptMeBo
Whether Arizonans will be able to receive assistance registering to vote while applying for a state fishing, hunting, or trapping license is now up to the Arizona Senate.
On Tuesday, the state House of Representatives approved Senate Bill 1170 by an overwhelming bipartisan 42 to 9 margin, with 9 representatives not voting. The bill requires the Arizona Game and Fish Department to assist with voter registration when accepting license applications, with the goal of allowing Arizonans the ability to update their voter registration or register to vote when they apply for AZGFD tags.
But getting the legislation to Gov. Doug Ducey’s desk will first require a vote by the state Senate.
Rep. David Cook (R-Globe) noted while voting in favor of SB1170 that the Arizona Department of Motor Vehicles already assists voters to register to vote. The same convenient, non-party affiliated option should be available for those seeking AZGFD licenses.
Cook’s comments came after Minority Leader Reginald Bolding Jr. spoke against SB1170, which he said is “singling out” AZGFD over other state agencies. Bolding (D-Laveen) claimed lawmakers have “spent a number of hours and resources” this session to make it more difficult for some departments to register individuals to vote, but SB1170 targets “a specific type” of individual with help in registering to vote.
Also speaking—and voting—against SB1170 was Rep. Pamela Powers Hannley, who has voted against several election integrity bills this session.
“It seems to me that this distributed process would add a lot of potentially untrained people registering people,” Powers Hanley (D-Tucson) stated in explaining her no vote. “There would be a lot of paper forms out there in multiple locations where they sell these permits, and I think that adding more people and more locations adds more risks for fraud in the future.”
If SB1170 is signed into law, it formally repeals similar AZGFD voter assistance language added to state law last year before the Arizona Supreme Court struck down the budget bill the language was included in. The new language includes two options for voter assistance, the first involving the AZGFD website.
If an Arizonan applies online for a fishing, hunting, or trapping license they would see a link to the Arizona Department of Transportation’s voter registration webpage. On the other hand, those applying for a license at a AZGFD office would be offered a paper voter registration form.
Those forms would come from the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, which is exactly where the completed forms are to be returned. From there, the AZSOS would forward any forms to the appropriate county recorder to determine voter eligibility.
As to the question of whether state agencies should be involved in voter registration efforts, House Speaker Rusty Bowers told the chamber during Tuesday’s vote about recently receiving a letter from Arizona Health Care Cost Containment Systems (AHCCCS) in regard to his daughter who died last year.
With the letter was a voter registration form as a courtesy, said Bowers (R-Mesa).
SB1170 is a way to increase the number of people registering to vote while ensuring they “do it right,” Bowers added, and “is right in line” with efforts to ensure election integrity. Having a state agency involved in promoting voter registration “is totally appropriate,” he said.
May 15 was National Peace Officers Memorial Day, which saw 619 names of officers killed in the line of duty across the country added to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial in Washington D.C. Among the names were 472 officers who died in 2021, including 319 fatalities from COVID-19 which were determined to be related to the performance of duty.
In Arizona, 26 law enforcement officers died last year in the line of duty. On May 2, Gov. Doug Ducey joined with the families, friends, and co-workers of the fallen to pay tribute to the sacrifices of those public safety professionals during a service at the Arizona Peace Officers Memorial located at the State Capitol.
Ducey read the names of the officers during the memorial service:
Chandler Police Officer Tyler Britt, End of Watch: Jan. 11, 2021
ASU Officer Joseph Henry Montgomery, EOW: Jan. 14, 2021
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer Byron Don Shields, EOW: Jan. 20, 2021
FBI Special Agent Jimmie John Daniels, EOW: Feb. 1, 2021
Maricopa County Juvenile Probation Officer John A. Gilbert, EOW: Feb. 21, 2021
Chandler Police Officer Christopher Farrar, EOW: April 30, 2021
Nogales Police Officer Jeremy Brinton, EOW: May 21, 2021
Phoenix Police Officer Ginarro A. New, EOW: May 31, 2021
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Officer Ruben Facio, EOW: July 17, 2021
U.S. Border Patrol Supervisory Agent Daniel P. Cox, EOW: July 31, 2021
Phoenix Police Officer Mathew A. Hefter, EOW: August 7, 2021
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Detention Officer Alicia Dawn Carter, EOW: Aug. 9, 2021
U.S Border Patrol Agent Chad E. McBroom, EOW: Aug. 29, 2021
Phoenix Police Sgt. Thomas Crawford Craig, EOW: Sept. 3, 2021
U.S. Border Patrol Agent Luis “Louie” Dominguez, EOW: Sept. 23, 2021
U.S. Border Patrol Agent Alfredo Ibarra, EOW: Sept. 27, 2021
U.S. DEA Group Supervisor Michael G. Garbo, EOW: Oct. 4, 2021
Mohave County Sheriff’s Detention Officer Anthony Nicoletti, EOW: Oct. 11, 2021
La Paz Sheriff’s Sgt. Michael D. Rudd, EOW: Oct. 11, 2021
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Deputy Juan Miguel “Johnny” Ruiz, EOW: Oct. 11, 2021
U.S. Border Patrol Supervisory Agent Anibal Antonio Perez, EOW: Nov. 5, 2021
Maricopa County Sheriff’s Lieut. Chad Brackman, EOW: Nov. 10, 2021
U.S. Border Patrol Supervisor Agent Martin Barrios, EOW: Nov. 29, 2021
Chandler Police Officer Jeremy Wilkins, EOW: Dec. 17, 2021
Each year, the names of officers who have perished while serving in the line of duty are engraved into the Memorial and honored during a service where family, friends, and colleagues of fallen officers gather to pay their respects. Among the 2021 deaths are several caused by COVID-19, according to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office.
A total of 388 names are engraved into one of eight double-sided granite panels surrounding the iconic bronze statue, with the earliest known line of duty death in Arizona being Yuma County Sheriff Cornelius “Corney” Sage, who was attacked and killed in May 1865 while traveling to Prescott on county business.
Members of the Arizona Peace Officers Memorial board are John Stevens for Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich (chairman); Deston Coleman for Col. Heston Silbert of Arizona Department of Public Safety; Director David Shinn of Arizona Department of Corrections; Andrew T. LeFevre for the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission; John Stair of the Arizona Probation Officer Association (vice-chairman); Jaime Escobedo, Peace Officer Memorial Board Historian; Graham County Sheriff P.J. Allred; Captain Lynn Ideus for the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police; Jeffrey Hawkins for Arizona State Troopers Association; Prescott Police Chief Amy Bonney; Ron Young (Business Community representative); W. Steven Martin (Business Community representative); Rick Davis, Survivor Member; and Jan Blaser-Upchurch, Survivor.
