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.”
BREAKING: Court Denies Board’s Motion to Stay Election Ruling Today, the Arizona Superior Court denied the Board of Supervisors’ Motion to Stay, delivering yet another decisive loss to the Board in its ongoing attempt to retain powers the Court has already ruled it does not… pic.twitter.com/nPuIDKMIPh
— Maricopa County Recorder's Office (@RecordersOffice) May 14, 2026
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.
The sole Maricopa County supervisor to extend support for the county recorder over the ongoing elections authority spat has requested court assistance with mediation.
In a filing last week in County Recorder Justin Heap’s case against the board of supervisors before the Maricopa County Superior Court, Supervisor Mark Stewart filed a response amending his vote from opposition against to support for his fellow supervisors’ motion to stay the ruling.
Some interpreted the filing as Stewart backtracking his support for the recorder. Stewart has sided with Heap generally on the proper division of elections authority.
Stewart said ongoing mediation attempts have failed and required court intervention.
“Supervisor Stewart supports a temporary stay solely for the purpose of mediation,” stated the filing. “Previous efforts at mediation have failed despite the parties all claiming a willingness to mediate based upon timing, preconditions, and disagreement over the mediator.”
Stewart requested the court order Heap and the board to attend a mediation before the court appointed mediator within the next two weeks.
In a video posted online, Stewart explained that his filing was not a challenge to the court ruling, like the motion put forth by his colleagues, but simply a means to “alleviate some of the operational ambiguity” within remaining questions of operations so that board and recorder staff could move forward.
“What we do not need is to prolong this conflict. We need a defined path forward,” said Stewart. “While we may have different views on the path forward, I know we all have the same goal of delivering reliable, secure, transparent elections for Maricopa voters.”
Stewart said he didn’t want the case to go to appeal. That was something his fellow supervisors desired.
Background on my court filing:
Court ordered mediation is not about the appeal.
Let’s use the time of the stay to negotiate operational challenges and accept the ruling.
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) May 5, 2026
Last month, the superior court ruled in Heap’s favor and restored the county recorder’s election powers. The court rejected the board’s claim of plenary authority and declared it had acted unlawfully beyond statutory authority. A specific finding of wrongdoing concerned the removal of personnel, systems, and equipment from the recorder’s office.
The court warned, further, that continued absconding of election powers by the board of supervisors would likely result in voter disenfranchisement.
“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 they had voted and to which they were entitled,” stated the ruling. “These harms will not resolve and may likely increase absent court intervention, particularly as general election cycles approach.”
The board argued in a filing earlier this week that the court’s ruling conflicted with state statute and would interfere with administration of the upcoming jurisdictional election scheduled to occur in less than two weeks.
“This ruling creates confusion about key aspects of election administration including chain of custody, on-site tabulation, and the handing of mail-in ballots on Election Day,” said Board of Supervisors Chair Kate Brophy McGee in a statement. “Making major changes in the middle of the election cycle is not just a terrible idea for voters, it’s going to be almost impossible to implement responsibly.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors are split over the court ruling ordering a restoration of election powers to the county recorder.
On Friday, the Maricopa County Superior Court invalidated the board’s claim of “plenary authority” via its general supervisory powers over elections administration.
“The board’s general authority does not override specific statutory delegations to other county officers,” read the ruling.
The court found that the board had “acted unlawfully and exceeded its statutory authority” by taking the recorder’s personnel, systems, and equipment. The ruling warned the board continuing in its path of harboring the recorder’s election resources would likely result in the disenfranchisement of voters.
“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 they had voted and to which they were entitled,” stated the ruling. “These harms will not resolve and may likely increase absent court intervention, particularly as general election cycles approach.”
The ruling ordered the board to allow the recorder to take up those duties expressly given to him by state law, and to fund all necessary expenses the recorder sets forth. The board was also ordered to return all IT staff, servers, databases, software, websites, and equipment to the recorder, or to fund replacement of those personnel and items.
Chairwoman Kate Brophy McGee disagreed with the court’s view that Recorder Justin Heap has authority in his own right over elections. McGee also contended with the court’s conclusion that the board had deprived the recorder of resources and staffing.
McGee said the board plans to appeal.
“The court correctly concluded that the Board oversees the county budget and makes all appropriations decisions. But I disagree with other portions of the ruling, and I will explore all options with the Board of Supervisors, including an expeditious appeal,” said McGee. “From day one, the Board of Supervisors has provided Recorder Heap the resources and staffing needed to fulfill his statutory duties. We will continue to do so because voters always come first.”
Unlike the rest of the board, Supervisor Mark Stewart issued his own statement expressing support for the court ruling. Stewart challenged the idea that the entire court fight was unavoidable.
“From the beginning, I supported a more transparent, public negotiation process, an approach that could have led to a different outcome and avoided unnecessary confusion, litigation, and cost,” said Stewart. “It is now time to move forward with a unified focus and give our team the resources they need to deliver transparent, secure, and best-in-class elections that the voters of Maricopa County deserve.”
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) April 18, 2026
Recorder Heap celebrated the ruling as redress for what he called an unjust “power grab” of his office’s elections authority.
“With this ruling, we will move forward focused on delivering the secure, transparent, and accessible elections the voters of Maricopa County deserve,” said Heap.
Major victory for the rule of law. The court rejected the Board’s power grab and restored the Recorder’s authority as the principal elections officer in the county. With this ruling, we will move forward focused on delivering the secure, transparent, and accessible elections the… https://t.co/8V7XYmYW7E
— Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap (@azjustinheap) April 17, 2026
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
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.
Maricopa County officials are highlighting updated options for voters who receive ballots by mail as part of preparations for the 2026 election cycle.
In a recent post on X, the county directed voters to information outlining “more options for voters who receive their ballot in the mail,” including guidance on how and where to return ballots.
Arizona is a predominantly a vote-by-mail state, with the majority of voters participating through the Active Early Voting List (AEVL), which automatically sends ballots to registered voters ahead of elections. According to the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, early voting typically begins 27 days before an election.
A new state law taking effect in 2026 provides additional options for voters returning early ballots, including expanded in-person verification and tabulation procedures.
According to Maricopa County election officials in a recent video update, voters who bring a sealed early ballot in the required affidavit envelope to a Vote Center prior to Election Day may check in and provide identification, allowing the ballot to be processed without signature verification at the county’s central tabulation facility.
On Election Day, voters may also bring their early ballot to a Vote Center, check in, present identification, and have the ballot tabulated on-site using equipment designated for early ballots. County officials noted these tabulators are distinct from those used for ballots issued and cast in person on Election Day. Ballots tabulated at Vote Centers are included in Election Night results.
Voters may continue to return early ballots by mail or by depositing them in authorized drop boxes. Under Arizona law, early ballots must be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day to be counted.
Maricopa County elections are administered jointly by the Board of Supervisors and the Recorder’s Office, which oversees voter registration and early voting.
Ongoing disputes between the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and the Recorder’s Office over election administration responsibilities have resulted in litigation and disagreements regarding control over certain election functions since Recorder Justin Heap took office in January 2025.
Maricopa County Supervisor Debbie Lesko also addressed election administration in recent statements, emphasizing coordination between county offices responsible for conducting elections.
Speaking to KTAR News’ The Mike Broomhead Show on March 6, Lesko said, “We need to work together to run smooth elections, and what has transpired is frustrating, but we’re working it out between the Recorder’s Office and the Board of Supervisors.”
In a March ruling, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge denied a request from the Board of Supervisors to introduce testimony compelled from Heap, finding the board’s actions fell outside proper legal procedures and could interfere with ongoing proceedings.
The court also raised concerns about the board’s use of subpoenas and attempts to introduce evidence obtained outside the judicial process, while the broader legal dispute between the two offices remains unresolved.
Supervisor Mark Stewart, however, expressed optimism at the time, saying that the parties were nearing a resolution following the Court’s ruling.
“Regardless of the back-and-forth or expressed frustrations from the Recorder’s office and the Board Chair, we are making progress and working together. It may not be perfect, but it is happening,” Stewart said.
County officials have continued to provide voter education materials and updates as part of ongoing preparations for the 2026 election cycle.
