It is no secret that an overwhelming number of Americans believe that only U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in our elections. It arguably is and ought to be the first and primary qualification to vote. But what good is that requirement if it isn’t verified? In other words, without proof of citizenship, we are relying on a simple stroke of a pen or pencil on a registration form, checking a small box attesting to citizenship.
That’s why in 2004 Arizona voters approved a measure to require proof of citizenship before registering to vote. But, in the 20 years since, that requirement has been whittled away and now there are tens of thousands of people voting in Arizona elections (often referred to as “Federal only” voters) without ever having provided evidence of their citizenship.
In response to this explosion of ‘Federal Only’ voters, the Arizona legislature passed two landmark bills, HB2492 and HB2243, to require proof of citizenship and regular, enhanced voter roll maintenance to ensure only eligible individuals are registering and voting in our elections.
What happened next shouldn’t surprise anyone that has watched the left fight every reasonable voter integrity measure around the country. As soon as both bills were signed into law, a dozen liberal organizations and the Biden Justice Department sued in federal court, claiming that the measures were unconstitutional, illegal, and (of course) racist.
The case was given to Bill Clinton appointed judge Susan Bolton, and after a year of litigation, she issued a confusing, disjointed two-part ruling that is destined for appeal. And while a few positives can be gleaned from the decision, the bad and ugly from the liberal opinion far outweighed the good…
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) is urging the Arizona legislature to appeal a ruling from the Arizona District Court striking down portions of two laws requiring proof of citizenship from voters. AFEC lobbied for and assisted in the drafting of the contested laws; now, it says it plans to file briefs in support of the appeals it hopes the legislature will file. The state has over 19,000 federal-only voters who haven’t submitted proof of citizenship.
Federal judge Susan Bolton ruled last week against provisions within HB2492 and HB2243 requiring proof of birthplace for voter registrations, investigations by county recorders based on the belief a voter is a noncitizen, and the voter’s disclosure of residence in order to register for federal elections. AFEC President Scot Mussi said in a press release that while it was a relief Bolton didn’t overturn the laws in their entirety, the provisions she did strike down were consequential.
“Though Arizonans can take solace in the fact that an activist judge didn’t completely dismantle these reasonable and commonsense laws, we are extremely disappointed in her decision to strike down several lawful provisions that we expect will be upheld on appeal,” said Mussi. “Officials across all branches and jurisdictions of our government should be working to uphold the integrity of our laws and to ensure that the votes of American citizens are not canceled or compromised by even a single illegal vote.”
Although Bolton struck down core provisions of the laws, she disagreed with the claims of activist groups that the legislators passed them with racist intent. However, Bolton did write that AFEC’s language in lobbying materials distributed to legislators was potentially discriminatory against Latinos. Per court documents, AFEC referred to illegal immigrants as “illegals.”
“[AFEC] disseminated lobbying materials by email to Arizona legislators that described how the Voting Laws would prevent ‘illegals’ from voting in Arizona elections,” said Bolton. “[T]he use of ‘code words’ may demonstrate discriminatory intent, and the term ‘illegals’ can evince racial animus for members of the Latino community in Arizona.”
“Illegals” is slang for individuals of any race and any country who migrated into the U.S. illegally, meaning the term isn’t restricted in its scope to Latino illegal immigrants.
Mussi also stated in AFEC’s press release that Bolton’s assessment amounted to a false accusation of discrimination. He said Bolton’s implication of racism was “laughable” considering that the illegal immigrants causing the border crisis have hailed from nearly all countries across the globe.
“It is outrageous that Judge Bolton would use an official court opinion to falsely accuse concerned and law-abiding American citizens of having racist intent in our efforts to pass legislation to strengthen election integrity in this state,” said Mussi. “This accusation is especially laughable when we consider the state of the open border, where millions of men, women, and children from more than 160 countries of origin have illegally crossed into America – many of whom are taking up residence and receiving benefits on the backs of hardworking taxpayers. It shouldn’t take a grassroots advocacy organization to point out the constitutional responsibility of a federal court, yet sadly, this is the present state of our nation.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
If Adrian Fontes likes spending time in court, he’s going to have a fun time in 2024. In case you’ve lost count, Arizona’s Secretary of State has been sued three times over his Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) in just the last two weeks. That’s what happens when you produce one of the most radical EPMs in Arizona’s history.
At the end of January, Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed a lawsuit against Fontes over a variety of provisions in his EPM that violate or conflict with current election laws in our state. But the party was just getting started.
Last week, the Arizona Republican Party, the Republican National Committee, and the Yavapai County GOP also sued Fontes for his blatant attempt to rewrite election law through his EPM. And on the same day, we filed our own lawsuit against Fontes over the promulgation of certain unlawful rules set forth in his EPM.
The reality is that, in his role as Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes is supposed to provide an EPM that gives impartial direction to county recorders to ensure uniform and correct implementation of election law. Instead, he prescribed certain rules without the power to do so and moved forward with an EPM that contains several “rules” that are unconstitutional.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) is suing Democrat Secretary of State Adrian Fontes due to certain rules in the latest Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) from December 2023, which the group believes are unlawful. The pro-free market nonprofit filed the legal challenge in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona for the County of Maricopa late last week.
AFEC is asking the court to strike down the provisions challenged by the lawsuit which are believed to contradict or exceed statutory authority.
“Secretary Fontes has produced one of the most radical elections procedures manuals in our state’s history,” said Scot Mussi, president of AFEC. “If the illegal provisions of this manual are allowed to stand, the integrity and transparency of state elections would continue to dissipate at the hands of leftwing ideologues.”
The complaint alleges that the 2023 EPM improperly places protected political speech at risk of criminal prosecution and has an unconstitutional chilling effect on protected political speech.
The provisions of the EPM that AFEC contends are unconstitutional include rules that: restrict observation of drop boxes and polling places, ban photography at election sites, and regulate speaking to people at election sites.
“These activities — watching drop boxes, speaking to people at election sites, and photographing activity at election sites — all constitute forms of speech,’’ the lawsuit says.
In addition to these claims, the lawsuit is challenging the 2023 EPM’s rules requiring political parties to open their primaries to federal only voters.
“The 2023 EPM also contradicts statutory requirements and exceeds statutory authority by opening the Presidential Preference Election to federal only voters, in essence, creating a new law out of whole cloth,” AFEC said in a news release.
The Free Enterprise Club details three counts for causes of action regarding the EPM, including speech, free association, and vagueness.
“We hope the court agrees with our arguments and forces the Secretary to adhere to state law,” Mussi said.
This isn’t the first lawsuit that’s been filed over the 2023 EPM. In January, Arizona’s leading legislative Republicans sued Fontes over the EPM. The Arizona Republican Party, Republican National Committee, and Yavapai County GOP filed their own lawsuit late last week.
Elizabeth Troutman is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send her news tips using this link.
When all else fails, cry racism. That seems to be the playbook the Far-Left utilizes any time it can’t make a coherent argument against election integrity laws. And here we are once again. The latest accusations of racism come amidst a series of depositions along with closing arguments in a lawsuit filed by a cabal of liberal organizations against two commonsense voter registration laws: HB 2243 and HB 2492.
Passed in 2022 and signed by then-Governor Ducey, HB 2243 ensures that only eligible voters remain registered by requiring regular voter roll maintenance. And so far, it has proven to be effective—revealing that over 78,000 individuals have been identified on Arizona’s voter rolls as either noncitizens or nonresidents. When you consider how close some of our state’s races were in 2022, these numbers should be great cause for alarm. But of course, many of those close races went in favor of Democrats, so the Left doesn’t want to ask too many questions.
HB 2492, which was also passed in 2022 and signed by then-Governor Ducey, bolsters safeguards to our voter registration process to require proof of citizenship ensuring that only U.S. citizens are voting in our elections. Where’s the controversy here? U.S. citizens cannot go into France, Australia, or any other country throughout the world and vote in their elections, so why should citizens from other countries be allowed to vote in our elections?
Not too long after both bills were signed into law, the Left filed a lawsuit against them and recently made a part of the proceedings about…the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (who is not a party in the lawsuit)…
