by Matthew Holloway | May 21, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap declined what his office described as a last-minute request from the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to appear before the board regarding a proposed resolution on ballot drop box locations, a move that further escalates an ongoing dispute over election authority in Arizona’s largest county.
The Recorder’s Office said it was not consulted on the proposed drop box locations and only became aware of them after the board publicly posted its meeting agenda. It added that the board requested Heap’s appearance with less than an hour’s notice, without providing advance questions or topics, and characterized the request as “political theater” rather than a genuine attempt at cooperation. The office also argued that Heap did not have sufficient time to review the proposal for legal compliance, operational feasibility, or voter access concerns.
According to a statement, the recorder’s legal counsel previously provided the board with objections asserting that Arizona law places authority over ballot drop boxes with the recorder’s office rather than the Board of Supervisors. The office also cited ongoing litigation between the parties as a reason Heap declined to participate in what it described as an impromptu public examination concerning active legal disputes.
“The Recorder remains willing to meet in a properly noticed setting and resolve these issues professionally and cooperatively if the Board is willing to do the same,” the statement said.
The dispute follows months of legal conflict between Heap and the Board of Supervisors over control of election administration duties in Maricopa County.
Heap said, “The law is not optional. The Court has already ruled that the Board does not possess unlimited authority over election administration, yet the Board continues attempting to exercise powers Arizona law assigns to the Recorder.” He added, “Voters deserve lawful, professional election administration, not political gamesmanship and last-minute public ambushes.”
In April, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott Blaney ruled largely in Heap’s favor in a lawsuit challenging the board’s authority over election operations. Blaney determined the board exceeded its statutory authority by maintaining control over election-related personnel, systems, and functions that legally belong to the recorder’s office. The ruling affirmed greater authority for the recorder over early voting administration and rejected the board’s assertion of broad supervisory authority over election administration.
The Board of Supervisors subsequently voted to authorize 237 vote centers and drop box locations for the upcoming July primary election, according to a press release issued the same day. The Board also voted unanimously to transfer funds to create eight full-time IT positions in the County Recorder’s Office.
“I am willing to put in the hours to work with Recorder Heap to hammer out our differences for the benefit of our voters,” MCBOS Vice Chair Debbie Lesko said during the meeting. “That is why the Chair and I are calling on Recorder Heap to come to the table.”
Chair Kate Brophy McGee said in a statement, “Election systems work best when chain of command and procedures are clear. That clarity is what the Board is seeking in requesting face-to-face meetings with Recorder Heap, as well as in our appeal of the ruling in Heap v. Galvin, et al.” She added, “We are committed to ensuring the Recorder is able to carry out his statutory duties just as we are committed to carrying out ours on behalf of voters.”
In a post to X, Heap wrote, “The Board is having a full meltdown because I objected to a resolution unlawfully giving themselves control over ballot drop boxes and declined to appear for a surprise public interrogation on less than an hour’s notice. The Court has already ruled that the Board does not have unlimited authority over elections, yet it continues attempting to exercise powers Arizona law assigns to the Recorder. Voters deserve lawful election administration, not political stunts and last-minute public ambushes.”
The dispute centers on how election responsibilities are divided between the recorder and the Board of Supervisors, including authority over early voting operations, election infrastructure, and ballot drop boxes. The board maintains it has sought negotiated agreements governing election administration, while Heap and his office argue Arizona law assigns specific election duties directly to the elected recorder. Maricopa County Superior Court denied the board’s request for a stay pending appeal on May 13 and ordered restoration of the recorder’s authority under the earlier ruling.
The drop box resolution and Heap’s refusal to appear before the board mark the latest developments in the continuing dispute as Maricopa County prepares for upcoming election cycles.
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Staff Reporter | May 16, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS) lost again in a court battle to keep election powers away from the county recorder.
The Arizona Superior Court issued a short, two-page ruling on Wednesday denying a motion from the MCBOS to stay pending appeal an earlier ruling by the court that ordered the Maricopa County Recorder’s powers to be restored.
Judge Scott Blaney denied the argument by the MCBOS that restoring election powers to Recorder Justin Heap this late in an election season would burden election workers and complicate the voting experience. Blaney refused to suspend disbelief to entertain a notion that the MCBOS hadn’t planned to lose the court case.
“But the Court finds it inexplicable that the Board of Supervisors — in the nine months since Recorder Heap filed the present lawsuit — would not have considered and planned for the possibility that the Court would rule in favor of Recorder Heap,” said Blaney.
Blaney also commented on a recent filing by Supervisor Mark Stewart, who was the sole “no” vote to appeal Blaney’s initial ruling in Heap’s favor. Stewart requested court-ordered mediation between MCBOS and the recorder. Stewart expressed concern that the court ruling hadn’t yielded the resolve either party had desired.
“While it appears that the Supervisor Stewart filed his request in good faith, the Court has little confidence that parties will use this stay for good faith negotiation and will instead see it as an opportunity to moot the Court’s Ruling through extended delay,” stated Blaney.
Blaney concluded by encouraging the MCBOS and Heap to engage in negotiations for a partial or full resolution of their election powers spat. Regardless of the outcome, Blaney pledged support for any mutual agreement.
“The Court remains willing to defer to the parties’ judgment as elected officials if they mutually reach a resolution through good faith negotiation,” said Blaney.
Heap said in a press release that the ruling further affirmed his right to maintain certain election authorities.
“This case was never about personalities or politics,” said Heap. “It was about whether Arizona law still means what it says. The Court answered that question decisively. It is time for the Board to accept reality, respect the rule of law, and focus on preparing for the upcoming elections.”
MCBOS appealed Blaney’s ruling, which was decided last month. That ruling rejected the MCBOS claim of plenary authority over elections administration, and ordered the board to restore to the recorder his elections personnel, systems, and equipment.
The board chair, Kate Brophy McGee, called the ruling “a total bust” rife with “so many fatal errors” in an interview with KTAR News last month. McGee explained that the motion for a stay pending appeal was to allow this election to be conducted under the ruled-against arrangement, so that questions of dividing elections powers could be figured out later.
McGee said the ruling failed to specify what elections administration powers ought to be restored to Heap.
“There is no clarity. There is confusion,” said McGee. “There is further potential for conflict, and we have to get this figured out[.]”
Arizona’s primary elections are scheduled for July 21, followed by the general election on Nov. 4.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 13, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Maricopa County’s former recorder, Stephen Richer, says Republican’s concerns over illegal alien voting are “bogus.”
The former elections leader for one of the nation’s biggest counties published that claim earlier this week in an opinion piece for The New York Times.
“Confirmed: non-citizens aren’t voting,” said Richer.
Richer cited state investigations into noncitizen voting in which voter rolls were cross-checked with citizenship status. The recorder said concerns over illegal alien voters were a myth jeopardizing democracy.
“People largely aren’t willing to risk their status in the United States — the land of economic opportunity — for the ability to cast one more vote out of hundreds of thousands or millions in a state and hundreds of millions in the country,” stated Richer. “Playing politics with the idea of fraudulent voters and stolen elections comes at a real cost to American confidence in our elections. It’s an affront to our democracy and to all those who work to deliver free and fair elections. It’s also an ominous sign for where things may be heading this year.”
However, the cross-check referenced by Richer doesn’t address the common practice of identity theft among illegal aliens. Voter rolls can only confirm the citizenship of the individual listed, not of an individual who may be usurping that identity.
According to some federal estimates, 75 percent of illegal aliens are using stolen identities. There’s about 11.5 million illegal aliens in the country per the latest federal estimate, which would mean over 8.6 million illegal aliens use stolen identities under those estimates. Around 7 million of those illegal aliens claim employment per the government.
Of the smaller number of illegal aliens whose employment is recorded on the books, the government’s low estimate for illegal alien identity theft totals over one million.
With that range of estimates, there may be anywhere from 20,000 to 170,000 illegal aliens living under stolen identities in each state, assuming equal population distribution.
A day after The New York Times published Richer’s opinion piece, the Department of Justice announced the case of another illegal alien convicted of voter fraud.
An illegal alien from Columbia voted in the 2024 presidential election under a stolen identity, which she’d been using for over 20 years. Lina Maria Orovio-Hernandez, 59, had obtained a Real ID and received over $400,000 in stolen federal benefits.
Those stolen benefits included over $250,000 in Housing and Urban Development rental assistance. Orovio-Hernandez also obtained eight other state IDs in addition to the Real ID she obtained in Massachusetts.
Since leaving the recorder’s office, Richer has taken up elections-related leadership positions that advance claims similar to the ones he made in his most recent opinion piece, to include senior practice fellow in American democracy with the Harvard Kennedy School and adjunct scholar with the Cato Institute.
Richer pulled away from the Republican Party during the 2024 election when he announced his intent to vote for Democratic candidate Kamala Harris.
Other illegal aliens have voted in elections without the use of identity theft.
Last month, an illegal alien pleaded guilty to voting in the 2020 election.
Last December, two illegal aliens were indicted for voting in the November 2020 general election.
Last November, an illegal alien from Mexico elected to be the local mayor was charged for having voted illegally numerous times over his decades spent in the U.S.
Last August, a Canadian citizen voted in two federal elections, once in 2022 and in 2024.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Feb 12, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Tesla CEO and former Department of Government Efficiency chief Elon Musk is urging the federal government to ban mail-in voting.
Musk and other top Republican leaders have signaled support for greater federal intervention in state and local elections.
“Voter ID and in-person voting is the only way to save democracy,” said Musk. “Critical to avoid fraud.”
Although X influencers said Musk’s comments were “breaking news,” the SpaceX CTO has advocated for in-person voting, along with ID requirements, for years.
“We should require government ID and in-person voting (unless valid medical/military/etc excuse), like other countries do or like if you want to buy beer,” said Musk in a comment over two years ago.
In the summer of 2024, Musk also advocated against electronic and drop box ballots. Musk said additional voting methods beyond in-person voting created additional variables that made it much more difficult to detect fraud.
“When combined with mail-in ballots, the system is designed to make it impossible to prove fraud,” said Musk. “Mail-in and drop box ballots should not be allowed, as cameras on the in-person voting stations would at least prevent large-scale fraud by counting how many people showed up vs ballots cast.”
Last week, Musk backed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, legislation to amend a gap in citizenship proof existing in the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The SAVE Act would require proof of citizenship in order to register to vote in federal elections.
Proof of citizenship would include a REAL ID-compliant ID, a passport, military ID with proof of U.S. birth, government-issued photo ID card with proof of U.S. birth, or a government-issued photo ID along with a certified birth certificate, an extract from a U.S. hospital record of birth, a final adoption decree, a consular report of birth abroad, a naturalization certificate or certificate of citizenship, or an American Indian card.
“It must be done or democracy is dead,” said Musk.
Rep. Andy Biggs, candidate for Arizona governor, said the bill wasn’t controversial as the media portrayed it.
“It’s not controversial to require proof of citizenship and a photo ID to vote — countries around the world require both!” said Biggs.
Reps. Eli Crane and Paul Gosar also support the legislation. The pair signed onto a letter urging the Senate to act on the legislation.
Although Musk departed DOGE over certain policy agreements earlier last year, he does agree with President Donald Trump on mail-in voting.
“No mail-in ballots (except for illness, disability, military, or travel),” posted Trump to Truth Social.
Trump had made his criticism of mail-in ballots during public conversations urging the passage of the SAVE Act, though the legislation doesn’t ban mail-in voting. Instead, the legislation would require mail voters to submit an application to receive their ballot.
The president has also issued another call to action not included in the SAVE Act: federalizing elections.
Last Monday the president said in an interview that the federal government should take over elections from the states. He proposed the takeover during the debut of former FBI director Dan Bongino’s newly resurrected podcast. Bongino will also return to his role as a Fox News contributor.
“We should take over the voting in at least many places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting,” said Trump. “We have states that are so crooked and they’re counting votes.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Jonathan Eberle | Nov 17, 2025 | News
By Jonathan Eberle |
The Arizona Freedom Caucus (AFC) is throwing its support behind a new election-related proposal from Rep. Alexander Kolodin, announcing its endorsement for the Arizona Secure Elections Act, a measure the group says is aimed at restoring trust and stability in the state’s voting system.
The bill outlines a series of election policy changes that AFC members argue are necessary to address ongoing concerns about administration errors, delays, and voter confidence. According to the caucus, repeated issues in recent election cycles have eroded public trust and demand a comprehensive response.
“The integrity of our elections remains a top priority,” the caucus said in its statement, pointing to what it described as persistent failures that have “made it impossible for reasonable people to trust the integrity of the process and therefore outcomes.” The AFC said its legislative agenda will continue to center on tightening election procedures and removing what it views as opportunities for error or abuse.
The Arizona Secure Elections Act would make a series of changes to election laws, including affirming the principle of “one citizen, one vote”; banning campaign or ballot-measure contributions from foreign individuals or corporations; requiring government-issued identification for all voters; ending early voting at 7 p.m. on the Friday before Election Day; prohibiting ballots from being cast or accepted after polls close on Election Day; guaranteeing access to in-person voting at local polling places; and requiring mail-in voters to confirm their mailing address every election year.
If approved by lawmakers, the measure would appear on the next general election ballot for voters to decide, setting up a statewide vote as soon as 2026. AFC Chair Sen. Jake Hoffman praised both the proposal and Kolodin’s involvement, calling the act a pivotal step toward what the caucus views as long-needed structural reforms.
“With our endorsement, we will be working to ensure that Arizonans have the opportunity to vote for this Act on the 2026 ballot,” Hoffman said, crediting Kolodin and other AFC members for advancing what he characterized as essential election security priorities.
The legislation, if passed, would bypass the governor and head directly to voters for final approval. The AFC says it intends to campaign for the measure statewide ahead of the 2026 election. The proposal is likely to draw significant attention as lawmakers continue to debate voting access, election security, and administrative reforms—issues that have dominated Arizona politics across several cycles.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
