by Corinne Murdock | Sep 6, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
Last week, a superior court judge ruled that Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and his predecessor, now-Gov. Katie Hobbs, enforced an Election Procedures Manual (EPM) that ran afoul of voter signature verification law. The problematic EPM in question was crafted by Hobbs in 2019.
The ruling came in the case Arizona Free Enterprise Club v. Fontes. Contrary to the law, Fontes claimed to the court that the term “registration record” was ambiguous and up for interpretation — meaning, he could decide what constituted a valid signature record for the purposes of verifying the validity of a ballot signature. For that reason, Fontes said that the lawsuit against his administration should be dismissed.
Judge John Napper disagreed, rejecting the motion to dismiss last Friday; he stated that only a voter’s signature used to register to vote was valid. Napper ordered Fontes to adhere to the definition of “registration record” for the purposes of signature verification.
“Here, the langu[ag]e of the statute is clear and unambiguous. The statute requires the recorder to review the voter’s registration record. The common meaning of ‘registration’ in the English language is to sign up to participate in an activity,” wrote Napper. “No English speaker would linguistically confuse the act of signing up to participate in an event with the act of participating in the event [….] Applying the plain and obvious meaning of ‘registration,’ the legislature intended for the recorder to attempt to match the signature on the outside of the envelope to the signature on the documents the putative voter used to register.” (original emphasis included)
Fontes petitioned the court to interpret the law to mean that other documents could be included in the definition of “registration record” based on a change of the law from reading “registration form” to “registration record.” Fontes argued that “record” was a more expansive term meant to encompass a greater set of documents than “form.” Fontes also argued that the term was ambiguous and therefore up to interpretation.
Napper rejected these arguments. The judge explained that the term change only expanded the “volume of documents” for signature verification to allow for review of multiple forms comprising a registration record. Napper also declared that the statute wasn’t ambiguous at all.
“That limitation remains the same, documents are part of the ‘registration record’ only if they involved the voter’s ‘registration,’” stated Napper. “[T]he recorder is to compare the signature on the envelope to the voter’s prior registrations (the record).”
Napper also declared that the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) correctly defined “registration record,” unlike Fontes and former Secretary of State Katie Hobbs (now governor) per her 2019 EPM. Napper ruled that Hobbs’ 2019 EPM violated the law.
“The 2019 EPM creates a process that contradicts the plain language of A.R.S. §16-550(A),” stated Napper. “Therefore, this portion of the EPM and the instruction from the Secretary do ‘not have the force of law.’”
Napper’s ruling acknowledges a major issue: in the four years of its use, Hobbs’ unlawful 2019 EPM signature verification instruction has carried “the weight of the law.”
Mi Familia Vota also intervened in the case and requested dismissal of AFEC’s lawsuit. They claimed that any real or existing issues with the EPM didn’t matter because Fontes would produce a new EPM this December that could potentially adhere to state law. Napper also rejected this argument. The judge pointed out that those in the executive branch, including Hobbs, have consistently failed to produce a valid EPM, including in 2021.
“While the production of a new EPM is statutorily required, the multiple offices of the executive branch have not consistently adhered to the statute’s dictates,” said Napper. “They were unable to produce an EPM in 2021. This is why the 2019 manual carries the force of law to this day. The Court has been unable to find any authority suggesting a case is not ripe for decision because a government actor may choose a different course of conduct in the future.” (emphasis added)
The case is ongoing, with a status conference scheduled later this month.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Aug 26, 2023 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
The people of Arizona deserve elections that are both accessible and secure—where it is easy to vote and hard to cheat. It is the duty of the legislature to pass bills that ensure this, the Governor to sign those bills into law, and the Attorney General to enforce those laws.
But the Secretary of State’s role is different. This elected official is supposed to provide an Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) that provides impartial direction to county recorders to ensure uniform and correct implementation of election law. But just like his predecessor in this role before him (now-Governor Katie Hobbs), our current Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has filled his EPM with unlawful provisions…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by AZ Free Enterprise Club | Aug 13, 2023 | Opinion
By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |
Clean and accurate voter rolls are a cornerstone to safe and secure elections. And they are required by both state and federal law. Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) specifically obligates states to conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters due to death or change of residence. The U.S. Supreme Court even backed this up in its 2018 decision in the case Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute.
But Arizona’s current Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and its former Secretary of State (now Governor) Katie Hobbs have failed to perform the necessary voter list maintenance. And right now, 14 Arizona counties are in violation of Section 8 of the NVRA…
>>> CONTINUE READING >>>
by Corinne Murdock | Aug 10, 2023 | News
By Corinne Murdock |
The secretary of state may face a lawsuit come November if he fails to clean up alleged dirty voter rolls in 14 counties.
In a letter submitted Tuesday, Arizona Free Enterprise Club President and Executive Director Scott Mussi — in his capacity as a voter — accused Secretary of State Adrian Fontes of not following Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
The pre-litigation letter alleged that four Arizona counties reported having more voters than voting-age adult citizens, per public voter registration records compared with Census Bureau data. These were identified as Apache County with 117.4 percent voter registration rate, La Paz County with 100.5 percent voter registration rate, Navajo County with 100.1 percent voter registration rate, and Santa Cruz County with 112.6 percent voter registration rate.
The letter also alleged that nine counties have voter registration rates exceeding 90 percent of adult citizens over 18 years old, and one county with its voter registration rate exceeding 80 percent, which outpace national voter registration rates in recent years. These counties were identified as Cochise (93.4 percent), Coconino (93.6 percent), Gila (90.6 percent), Maricopa (97.8 percent), Mohave (95.2 percent), Pima (92 percent), Pinal (91.8 percent), Yavapai (99 percent), Yuma (94.3 percent), and Graham Counties (81.1 percent).
The national voter registration rate sits at around 69.1 percent, per the Census Bureau. In Arizona, those rates were 76.4 percent in 2020 and 68.6 percent in 2018.
As of last month, there were nearly 4.2 million registered voters. Independent voters lead with 1.45 million registrants (34.5 percent), followed by Republicans with 1.44 million (34.4 percent), Democrats with 1.26 million (30 percent), Libertarians with 33,700 (0.8 percent), and No Labels members with 8,500 (0.2 percent).
“Discrepancies on this scale almost certainly cannot be attributed to above-average voter participation, but instead point to deficient list maintenance,” stated the letter.
The letter requested that Fontes modify the current list maintenance procedures to identify and remove individuals who are ineligible to vote due to a change in residence, incarceration, death, or those ineligible for other reasons.
Arizona voters weren’t alone in this endeavor. Also on Tuesday, Virginia voters filed a similar pre-litigation letter accusing the Virginia Commissioner of Elections Susan Beals of similar NVRA negligence across 101 counties. The Honest Elections Project (HEP) assisted both Arizona and Virginia voters in their pre-litigation notices. The voters gave their respective election leaders 90 days to comply with the NVRA, and 45 days to respond to the letter.
The requested response would include details of the NVRA compliance efforts, policies, and programs Fontes has taken or plans to take prior to the 2024 general election, along with complete timelines and results for any ongoing plans.
In a press release, Mussi said that it wasn’t only Fontes but the former secretary of state Katie Hobbs, now governor, which were to blame for the dirty voter rolls.
“It is apparent that Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and his predecessor have failed to perform the necessary voter list maintenance required by state and federal law,” said Mussi. “Clean and accurate voter rolls are a cornerstone to safe and secure elections, and we expect that our election officials will address these issues as quickly as possible.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Daniel Stefanski | Aug 7, 2023 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
Arizona Republican Legislators continue to share their concerns about the progression of the latest Election Procedure Manual (EPM).
On Friday, Arizona State Representatives Michael Carbone and Steve Montenegro issued a press release, “criticizing an extremely short public comment period set by Secretary of State Adrian Fontes for his 2023 EPM.” They demanded that Fontes “extend the deadline for public comment” after the state’s election chief set the deadline for August 15.
In a statement, Carbone said, “Requiring public comments to be submitted by August 15th is simply too restrictive and does not provide adequate time for interested stakeholders to review the draft 2023 EPM for compliance with state law. It is our understanding that several provisions have already been identified that appear to run afoul of state law. We urge Secretary Fontes to extend the public comment deadline to at least September 1, 2023, to give the public an adequate opportunity to review and provide input on the most important elections manual that will guide county officials in administering their duties in the 2024 elections.”
Montenegro added, “The Elections Procedures Manual is of paramount importance to ensuring the integrity and security of election administration in Arizona. Secretary Fontes should have given the public more than 15 days to review his extensive 259-page draft of the EPM and submit comments. A longer comment period is particularly necessary and reasonable this year because Arizona has not had a legally compliant EPM since 2019.”
Carbone and Montenegro encouraged “Arizona voters to participate in the process to keep both elected and unelected election officers transparent and accountable” by submitting public comments to the draft EPM.
On Tuesday, August 1, Secretary Fontes commenced the 15-day public comment period for the 2023 EPM. Fontes wrote, “As a former County Recorder, I understand how important this manual is for the dedicated Arizonans who are entrusted with one of the toughest and most important jobs in our democracy. In an atmosphere of heightened scrutiny of our elections, local and county officials need clear guidance based on law. Now that we are at the start of our public comment period, I look forward to continuing this important conversation about a document that is essential to the running of safe, secure, and accurate elections in every corner of our state.”
Fontes emphasized the input that had already gone into the drafting of the EPM, assuring readers “It is important that the people who administer Arizona’s elections – the statutorily required stakeholders – be given the first opportunity to suggest changes. He revealed that his office had initiated “a series of monthly meetings with local and county election officials to suggest changes and garner feedback.”
The warning from Carbone and Montenegro follows a recent letter that was transmitted to Secretary Fontes by Representatives Jacqueline Parker and Alexander Kolodin, who highlighted certain issues with the initial copy of the EPM that they had seen from his office. That letter from the two legislators, written just days before Fontes allowed the public to view the document, identified eight possible violations of Arizona statutes in four chapters of the draft EPM. The legislators commented that they “are looking forward to seeing these provisions addressed prior to the EPM’s submittal to the Governor and the Attorney General on October 1, 2023.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
