by Staff Reporter | Jun 19, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
This November, voters will decide on a resolution amending the Arizona Constitution to further prevent noncitizen voting and foreign influence in elections.
House Concurrent Resolution 2001 passed the legislature along party lines last week. The Arizona Secure Elections Act, also known as the FAST Election Results Act, will appear on the general election ballot.
The resolution would amend the state constitution to repeat an existent declaration that only U.S. citizens may register and vote in Arizona elections. The resolution would also ban foreign nationals from contributing or expending money or anything of value to influence an Arizona election, and would require voters to show valid government-issued proof of identity for all voting methods prior to casting their ballot — including mail voting.
Republican State Sen. Alexander Kolodin (LD3), the resolution sponsor and secretary of state candidate, issued a press release describing the legislation as an opportunity for voters to establish better safeguards for elections by enshrining these proposed rules in the state constitution.
“For years, Arizonans have watched the same election problems repeat while trust in the system has eroded,” said Kolodin. “Election laws should be written by Arizonans, not dictated by bureaucrats, activists, or outside interests.”
Democrats and Republicans argued over the impact of the resolution during the Senate vote last Friday.
Senate Democrats criticized the legislation as redundant at best and a fatal threat to voting by mail at worst.
State Sen. Lauren Kuby (D-LD8) claimed the resolution was a “backdoor attempt” to end mail-in voting. Kuby accused Republicans of being stooges for President Donald Trump’s election policy preferences at the expense of Arizona voters.
“It’s disturbing to see the legislature put the desires of a sad, desperate man above their very own constituents,” said Kuby.
State Sen. Priya Sundareshan (D-LD18) called the bill “unnecessary” and filled with “vague” language, saying the state constitution’s present voter ID and citizenship proof requirements were enough.
State Sen. Analise Ortiz (D-LD24) said the bill was “voter suppression” and “a state-level SAVE Act.” Ortiz argued the resolution would enable lawmakers to repeal mail-in voting in the future. Ortiz claimed Trump was “plotting to meddle in the 2026 midterms.”
“The real goal of this is to make it harder for eligible voters to vote,” said Ortiz. “Our democracy is being systemically dismantled across the country.”
State Sen. Mitzi Epstein (D-LD12) said the legislation’s declaration that only citizens were eligible to vote was not only redundant and unnecessary, but that the other provisions would create an undue burden on mail-in voters.
“This bill opens the door to no more mail-in ballots,” said Epstein.
State Sen. Theresa Hatathlie (D-LD6) claimed the resolution was a template to “lay the groundwork for Project 2025.”
Republicans countered that existing voter registration requirements already require proof of citizenship, and that voters already anticipate security measures when casting ballots.
Majority Leader John Kavanagh (R-LD3) accused Democrats of “confusing the issue” and misleading voters.
“You’re only scaring people and creating a false argument,” said Kavanagh.
State Sen. David Farnsworth (R-LD10) said an increasing number of Arizonans have lost faith in their elections, and that this resolution was the means of remedying that sentiment.
“Our motive is not to make it more difficult to vote, but to make our elections more secure so that all of us can have confidence that those who vote their votes will be counted properly, and that those who win the most votes will be elected,” said Farnsworth.
State Sen. Jake Hoffman (R-LD15) argued that the “overwhelming majority” of Arizonans support these proposed provisions within the resolution.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Jun 15, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Republican State Rep. Alex Kolodin (LD3) is one of two contenders vying to unseat incumbent Secretary of State Adrian Fontes.
Kolodin, a longtime election lawyer, has been in the Arizona legislature since 2023.
Kolodin has previously defeated Fontes under different circumstances.
In 2020, Kolodin won an Arizona Supreme Court case against Fontes which determined the latter, while Maricopa County Recorder, had wrongly told mail voters that crossing out votes wouldn’t spoil their ballots. That ruling allowed Arizonans to further challenge election officials on unlawful actions.
In 2024, Kolodin again defeated Fontes in court, securing a requirement for the latter to comply with duties under the National Voter Registration Act.
Earlier this year, Kolodin successfully passed an election integrity bill (HB 2022) to ensure Arizona’s election timeline aligned with federal requirements and protected military members overseas from disenfranchisement.
Kolodin also led on HCR 2001, the Arizona Secure Elections Act, which promises to strengthen voter ID requirements through an amendment to the Arizona Constitution. The measure passed the Arizona Legislature and is now headed to the statewide ballot. If approved by voters, the amendment would mandate voter ID, declare citizenship as a mandatory qualification for registering and voting in elections, ban foreign funding in elections, and limit ballot acceptance times to Election Day.
Facing off against Kolodin in the primary is former Arizona Republican Party Chair Gina Swoboda.
Kolodin and Swoboda debated last month, with PBS moderating. Both said voters desire more reasons to trust their elections: competence, transparency, reliability, and experience.
Swoboda acknowledged that many voters believe elections have been rigged in recent years, but that the state has addressed issues with the administration, Elections Procedures Manual (EPM), and equipment through legislation and court challenges.
“The way I say it is, when people say, ‘Was it stolen?’, they were stolen fair and square,” said Swoboda.
Swoboda said issues with the EPM would always exist, but that the only issues that matter are those that affect the outcome of the election.
“We just won everything that was winnable in [20]24,” said Swoboda.
Kolodin disagreed with Swoboda’s view that the issues with the elections system, namely the EPM, have been resolved. He pointed to the Pima County GOP lawsuit against Fontes which alleges that Fontes’ EPM threatens voters’ free speech.
“The voters of Arizona are ready to move forward and have an elections system that we can be proud of,” said Kolodin.
Kolodin also questioned why Swoboda continues to defend the exclusion of political party observers in the EPM. Swoboda said she was merely backing what the law was at the time.
Swoboda criticized Kolodin for his 2023 admonishment by the State Bar of Arizona. Kolodin was punished for participating in lawsuits challenging the 2020 election.
Kolodin defended mail-in voting as the right of Arizona voters, and said that his efforts in the legislature have been to make that voting method more secure.
“Arizonans love our mail-in voting. Most Arizonans use mail-in voting, and nobody is coming to take that away,” said Kolodin.
Similarly, Swoboda said that Arizona has used mail-in voting for a while and does it well, and indicated that Arizona has further to go to secure the voting method against potential fraud.
The two contended whether the ballot referral under HCR2001 would “crush” mail-in voting. Kolodin claimed Swoboda was “misleading” voters on the referral, which he said was measures to improve the security of mail-in voting. Swoboda claimed the county recorders stand opposed to the referral.
“The voters of Arizona are the only stakeholders that I care about,” replied Kolodin.
Kolodin said it was “extremely important” to boost voter participation, especially in rural areas. However, Swoboda said it wouldn’t be her job as the secretary of state to ensure voter turnout was high.
In closing statements, Kolodin said his focus was on restoring public perception of integrity in Arizona’s elections.
“What the voters have been waiting for is elections that we can be proud of again,” said Kolodin.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | May 20, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Republican candidate for the Arizona secretary of state race stands in support of precinct-based voting.
Alexander Kolodin, a Republican lawmaker representing LD3, told Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller in a sit-down interview that precinct-based voting had “the opposite” effect of disenfranchising disabled voters.
Rather, Kolodin said that the vote center model preferred by his opponent — incumbent Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat — presents a greater risk for disenfranchisement because of the distance between vote centers.
“Precinct-based voting — I want to make this very clear — is the opposite of disenfranchising disabled voters. It is the vote center model that disenfranchises the most disabled voters because, again, it’s that travel time, it’s that distance,” said Kolodin.
Kolodin added that the distances between vote centers compared to precinct polling were more costly, gas- and time-wise. Kolodin likened the cost to taxation, with the greater burden on disabled voters.
“It’s almost a poll tax. Imagine how much gasoline it costs these days to drive 30 miles. You drive 30 miles there and back, I tell you in my car that’s going to cost me $10, $15 bucks. So, I’d have to pay that money in order to vote,” said Kolodin. “It’s hard for me to get a caregiver who can have that much time to take me if I’m a disabled person that far to vote, whereas if I have a polling place in my precinct, that becomes a much easier lift for me.”
Earlier this month, Secretary of State Fontes lost a court fight with Pinal County over its precinct-based voting model. Fontes sued in 2024 to force the county to adopt vote centers under the guise of retaining precinct-based voting.
In the 2025 Election Procedures Manual (EPM), Fontes mandated that all counties with precinct-based voting repurpose the Accessible Voting Devices (AVDs) to contain provisional ballots for the entire county. AVDs were intended and used exclusively in the past for voters with disabilities. Under Fontes’ design, precinct-based polling places would deprioritize voters with disabilities by requiring them to share this specialized voting equipment with out-of-precinct voters.
The court ruled that Fontes’ mandate would likely disenfranchise disabled voters.
Fontes dismissed the judge’s ruling as “sid[ing] with conspiracy theorists” in a social media post. He claimed his 2025 EPM policy wasn’t rooted in a desire to force “de facto” vote center models, as the court ruling stated, but instead an intent to allow voters with disabilities to vote wherever they wanted in the county.
“We were trying to help voters with disabilities just go to whatever polling place they can get to the easiest and cast a ballot from anywhere in their county,” said Fontes. “Unfortunately, for now, the politics have won in the court.”
However, that EPM policy didn’t explicitly limit AVDs usage to out-of-precinct voters with disabilities. The policy opened up the AVDs to all out-of-precinct voters.
“If the voter declines or is unable to travel to the voter’s assigned polling place, permit the voter to vote a provisional ballot in the correct ballot style for the voter’s assigned precinct using an accessible voting device that is programmed to contain all ballot styles,” stated the 2025 EPM. “The election official should inform the voter that their provisional ballot will be counted only if it is confirmed the voter is otherwise eligible to vote and did not vote early or at another voting location and had that other ballot counted as determined by the County Recorder.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Apr 19, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors overstepped and must restore elections authority to Recorder Justin Heap, according to a new court ruling.
The Maricopa County Superior Court rejected the board of supervisors’ argument in a new ruling issued on Friday in Justin Heap v. Thomas Galvin, et al. The court said the board does not enjoy “plenary” authority over election administration. Judge Scott Blaney ruled this view wasn’t consistent with Arizona law.
“The Board’s general authority does not override specific statutory delegations to other county officers,” stated Blaney. “The Legislature has authority over the conduct of elections and determines the extent to which the Board may conduct them. The Board may not override these specific allocations by invoking general supervisory authority.”
The court opted for a more balanced view of the law in which both the board and recorder have duties expressly given in elections administration. Blaney’s ruling interpreted Arizona law to reflect that the board holds only those powers expressly delegated to it. The same goes with the recorder.
“Where a valid delegation of authority exists, the delegation must clearly delineate the designated agency or officer,” said Blaney. “Arizona’s election statutes clearly delineate the Recorder as the designated officer for the 111 functions assigned to the ‘recorder or other officer in charge.’ The Board cannot substitute itself for the Recorder without either the Recorder’s consent or express legislative authorization.”
With this view, Blaney said the board had a duty to release withheld funding for those necessary expenses for which Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap has fought for months. The Arizona legislature appropriated $4.1 million from the state general fund for the recorder’s office for elections-related operations. That funding hasn’t been spent.
Blaney also ordered the board to abstain from weaponizing its budgetary authority as a bargaining chip. Blaney went one step further to preserve Heap’s statutory authority, specifying that the board couldn’t exercise those election funds designated to his office without his consent.
As a major part of restoring the power balance, Judge Blaney ordered the board to either return control of IT staff, servers, databases, software, and elections systems to the recorder’s office, or to fund their immediate replacement.
Should the board fail to restore Heap’s functions, Blaney warned that disenfranchisement could occur.
“[T]he Board has acted unlawfully and exceeded its statutory authority by seizing the Recorder’s personnel, systems, and equipment and refusing to return them to the Recorder’s control[,]” said Blaney. “The evidence at trial established that the Recorder’s inability to exercise meaningful control over election systems and staff will likely cause concrete operational harms, including inability to timely process provisional ballots under A.R.S. § 16-134, resulting in voters being denied tabulation of the full ballots that they had voted and to which they were entitled. These harms will not resolve and may likely increase absent court intervention, particularly as general election cycles approach.”
Immediately following the ruling, Heap declared his victory in a press release. Heap credited America First Legal along with attorney and state representative Alexander Kolodin (R-LD3) for the favorable ruling.
“The court confirmed that the Board cannot override state law, use funding as leverage, or take control of election duties assigned to the Recorder,” said Heap. “This ruling restores both the authority and the resources necessary for my office to do its job.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 20, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Arizona House passed new regulations addressing nicotine products that allegedly target children.
HB 4001 passed out of the House on Monday, 32-19.
The bill passed with majority support from Republican members. Five Democratic members and three Republican members voted against the bill.
Arizona law prohibits individuals under the age of 21 from purchasing or possessing tobacco or vapor products.
HB 4001, as passed by the House, would prohibit marketing, advertising, or selling alternative nicotine products in containers depicting any cartoon character mimicking a character primarily aimed at entertaining, mimicking a trademark or a symbol aimed at minors, including the image or name of a celebrity, or meaning to disguise the appearance of an alternative nicotine product.
The bill would also expand the powers and requirements for the Department of Liquor Licenses and Control (DLLC) to enforce laws against the sale or possession of alternative nicotine products to those under 21. Come 2028, the legislation would also require individuals to obtain licenses for the sale and manufacture of alternative nicotine products. Those licenses would need renewal every two years.
State Rep. Jeff Weninger (R-LD13) said in a statement that the legislation strengthens state oversight of the nicotine market.
“Arizona should not tolerate a market where nicotine products are packaged to look like toys and sold with weak oversight,” said Weninger. “This bill puts guardrails in place, holds bad actors accountable, and makes clear that if you are in this business, you are going to follow the law.”
State Rep. Cesar Aguilar (D-LD26) said the “fine print” of the bill would prevent Attorney General Kris Mayes from taking action against vaping companies. Aguilar accused Weninger of pushing a bill backed by Big Tobacco and vape retailers. Aguilar took particular issue with the $10,000 fine for individuals who distribute, manufacture, or sell alternative nicotine products without a license, arguing it was too low.
“They don’t care about our children, they care about their pockets. If we really wanted to protect youth of Arizona, we would empower the attorney general to go after these predatory companies, not take away [her] power to enforce,” said Aguilar.
State Rep. Alexander Kolodin (R-LD3) argued against the bill for different reasons. Kolodin said the legislature shouldn’t be focused on expanding regulatory oversight. Instead, Kolodin advocated for the legislature to take a hands-off approach so parents could address the issue.
“Let the parents of Arizona decide how they’re going to monitor and discipline their kids to make sure their kids are not accessing anything they’re not supposed to be accessing,” said Kolodin. “50 years ago that concept in this country was common sense, and I have no idea why this body has chosen so often to depart from it, but I choose not to.”
Weninger defended his bill from the bipartisan naysayers. He emphasized the legislation’s focus was necessary to hold manufacturers, distributors, and retailers responsible for enticing children with nicotine products.
“The status quo is, kids are in the high school bathrooms vaping and smoking because it’s being sold to minors. This would severely penalize those people,” said Weninger.
Weninger indicated the Senate may have more amendments for his bill, but he didn’t specify what those would entail.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
