Arizona Voter Rolls Contain 500,000 Unqualified Voters. We’re Suing To Clean Them Up.

Arizona Voter Rolls Contain 500,000 Unqualified Voters. We’re Suing To Clean Them Up.

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

Last Friday, the AZ Free Enterprise Club filed a lawsuit in federal court against Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes for failing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act’s (NVRA) mandate that he maintain accurate and updated voter registration records. Why? The data shows that there are 500,000 unaccounted for registered voters who are not qualified either due to death or moving out of the state, and in total, up to more than a million voters on the rolls who should not be registered.

Clean and accurate voter rolls are the bedrock of elections run with integrity. Ensuring only those eligible to vote may register and are on the rolls means that only eligible voters may vote in an election. It’s a basic principle: garbage in, garbage out. If we begin with bad data – ineligible individuals on the rolls – the system is susceptible to allowing ineligible ballots to be cast.

That’s why in 2022 we championed two landmark pieces of legislation to accomplish just that, and why, unsurprisingly, Marc Elias and the left’s lawfare machine immediately sued to stop these commonsense safeguards from going into effect. HB2492 ensures only eligible citizens who have provided proof of citizenship can register to vote and HB2243 requires regular and routine voter roll maintenance using several databases of information, with regular reports to the legislature of the results.

Both these laws are consistent with the NVRA’s mandate that states maintain accurate voter registration lists. But right now, Adrian Fontes is failing in his obligations under both, and that’s why we have filed a lawsuit in federal court to force him to do his job.

Four Counties Have More Registered Voters Than People

How do we know? According to the most recent census and voter registration data, more than 90% of the voting age population in Arizona is purportedly registered to vote. The national average is 69.1%. Why would Arizonans register to vote at an absurdly higher rate than the rest of the country? The only answer is that the state and counties are failing to adequately remove individuals who are no longer eligible, leading to bloated rolls…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>> 

Democrats’ Russiagate Lawyer Victorious, Citizenship Voting Laws Struck Down

Democrats’ Russiagate Lawyer Victorious, Citizenship Voting Laws Struck Down

By Corinne Murdock |

The Democratic Party’s go-to election lawyer that played a principal role in Hillary Clinton’s Russiagate hoax scored a victory against two Arizona laws requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Judge Susan Bolton — appointed by Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton — issued the ruling last week.

Bolton ruled in the Arizona District Court case Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes that the two laws, HB 2492 and HB 2243, asked too much of voters by requiring proof of citizenship in order to vote. Bolton said the requirement constituted an “additional burden” that “disadvantages” voters.

Elias called proof of citizenship requirements “voter suppression.”

Whether or not the judge had ruled in favor of the state laws, the secretary of state’s office has apparently been ignoring certain reporting requirements in one of the contested laws. The Arizona Daily Independent reported that the legislature received neither of the required quarterly records on canceled voter registrations due to deaths, driver’s licenses in other states, jury questionnaire answers, and inactive voting history. 

Bolton determined that the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), the federal voter registration requirements and policies signed into law by Clinton, preempted both state laws. The NVRA requires states to register voters for federal elections using the federal government’s form; this form doesn’t require proof of citizenship, yet individuals may still cast votes in federal elections. 

After the Supreme Court told Arizona in a 2013 ruling that it couldn’t reject NVRAs based on its lack of citizenship proof, then-Secretary of State Ken Bennett split the voter registration system to require proof of citizenship in statewide and local races, while offering the NVRA as an option to vote in federal races only. Those voters who capitalize on the latter are known as “federal-only” voters.

AZ Free News reported in 2021 that there were over 11,600 federal-only voters in the 2020 election based on limited vote data from several counties, most of which came from Maricopa County. That’s compared to the 1,700 federal-only votes cast in the 2018 election. At the time of our 2021 reporting, not all counties were publicly posting their federal-only ballots cast despite state law requiring the disclosure. 

“[A]fter each general election, [the county recorder] shall post on the recorder’s website the number of ballots cast by those persons who were eligible to vote a ballot containing federal offices only,” states the law.

It appears that the state’s two largest counties neglected to adhere to the federal-only ballot disclosure law for the 2022 election. 

Maricopa County didn’t publish a file like they did in 2020 disclosing the number of federal-only ballots cast for the 2022 election. 

Pima County displayed the number of federal-only ballots cast for 2020, but it didn’t issue an update or similar public display for last year’s election. The county recorder only disclosed the number of provisional ballots it accepted or denied based on federal-only status in its December after-action report: 51, compared to the 107 provisional federal-only ballots accepted in the 2020 election and 108 provisional federal-only ballots accepted in the 2018 election.

Most of these federal-only ballots are likely absentee. About 89 percent of all voters in Arizona cast their vote by mail-in ballot. 

In last week’s ruling, Bolton opined that the NVRA only allows states to place limits on mail-in voting when it comes to first-time voters, and not under any additional circumstances, like requiring proof of citizenship.

“Had Congress intended to permit states that allow absentee voting to require in-person voting under additional circumstances — including when a registrant fails to provide DPOC — it could have said so in the NVRA,” wrote Bolton. “Not only does the statute exclude failure to provide DPOC among the reasons a state may require an individual to vote in person, but as explained below, the purpose of the NVRA supports an interference that Congress meant to limit the number of circumstances in which a state could prevent an individual from voting by mail.” 

The court addressed whether the laws were conducive to enhancing the participation of eligible citizens as voters in elections for federal office. The Fifteenth Amendment expressly assigns the right to vote with U.S. citizens, with the definition of citizenship provided in the amendment immediately preceding, the Fourteenth Amendment

Bolton also ruled that the state failed to limit its systemic purges of voter rolls from occurring within 90 days of an election. She rejected arguments from the state that this 90-day window didn’t apply to voters who were found to be noncitizens. Meaning, individuals not qualified to vote can’t be purged from voter rolls in a systematic manner if they’re discovered as ineligible within 90 days of an election; these removals may only occur on a strictly individual basis.

“While the Court agrees with Plaintiffs that the State may still conduct individualized voter removals within the 90-day window, the systematic removal program mandated by HB 2243 violates Section 8(c)(2) of the NVRA,” stated Bolton. 

Bolton opted not to rule yet on several issues. Two concerned the state’s requirement of investigations and cancellations of the voter registrations of those noncitizens identified through various government databases. Another concerned the state’s requirement of an individual to disclose their citizenship and birthplace, which Bolton noted were only in violation of the Materiality Provision when also providing the state with DPOC.

“The Checkbox Requirement violates the Materiality Provision when an applicant provides satisfactory evidence of citizenship,” stated Bolton.

Ruling on those questions will be issued sometime after the November trial. 

Elias was joined in the lawsuit against the laws by the Department of Justice (DOJ) last summer.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

Judge Deals The Free Enterprise Club An Important Win Over Fontes’ Illegal Signature Verification Process

Judge Deals The Free Enterprise Club An Important Win Over Fontes’ Illegal Signature Verification Process

By the Arizona Free Enterprise Club |

Secretary of State Adrian Fontes appears to be in a tug-of-war with Governor Katie Hobbs to determine who is worse at their job. It’s been well-documented that since she took office, Hobbs has been off to a rough start with high-profile staff exits, breaking the veto record after killing the bipartisan “Tamale Bill,” and alienating many Democrats by signing the Republican budget. But over the past eight months, Fontes has been working just as hard in the battle to see who’s more incompetent. Not only has he failed to perform the necessary voter list maintenance—leaving 14 Arizona counties in violation of Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act—but he rushed through a version of the Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) that is filled with unlawful provisions.

Now, Secretary of State Fontes has been dealt another major blow after a superior court judge ruled against him…

>>> CONTINUE READING >>> 

Biden, Democratic Leaders Split With Go-To Election Lawyer

Biden, Democratic Leaders Split With Go-To Election Lawyer

By Corinne Murdock |

Democratic leadership and Biden officials split with their go-to election lawyer, Marc Elias; a 2021 Supreme Court loss from Arizona served as a major catalyst for the breakup. In that case, Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, the court effectively gutted the federal Voting Rights Act by upholding Arizona’s restrictions on out-of-precinct voting and ballot harvesting. 

Although Elias and Democratic leaders parted ways in April, it wasn’t until this past week that details of the split came to light. 

According to unnamed sources who spoke with Axios, Elias went rogue in the Biden administration’s eyes: filing lawsuits without notice or consent, with Biden leaders only learning of them via social media or mainstream reporting; racking up large bills, such as the $20+ million payout from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Biden campaign for defending the 65 lawsuits challenging the 2020 election results; and public criticism of a bipartisan election bill crafted by key Biden leadership and Democrats.

Elias’ tactics also differed from the reported desires of Biden leadership. While Elias viewed all fights as worth taking up, Biden officials wanted to be more selective. 

Elias was a longtime legal bulldog for the DNC. In 2016, Elias served as general counsel for the 2016 campaign of presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. Following Clinton’s loss, Elias served as a principal player in the Russiagate scandal. As Clinton’s general counsel, Elias billed for his hire of the opposition research firm, Fusion GPS, that created the Steele dossier: the Russian collusion allegations against former President Donald Trump leaked to Buzzfeed ten days before Trump’s inauguration that became a shadow over Trump’s entire presidency.

In 2020, Elias’ work resulted in key reforms to election law that lent to Democratic victories and the defense of challenges to President Joe Biden’s election. 

As AZ Free News reported last November, Elias’ firm launched in 2021, Elias Law Group, was a listed address for the Black Lives Matter headquarters. The firm stated in the latest BLM’s IRS filing that it maintains all of BLM’s books and records. According to Federal Elections Commission (FEC) records, the Black Lives Matter PAC paid Elias’ firm over $14,800 from January to December of last year. Per their latest FEC filing on Monday, BLM has paid Elias’ firm nearly $3,000 so far this year.

One of the other main recipients of the BLM PAC’s disbursements is Premier Political Compliance founded and led by the former compliance director Christine Neville of the Perkins Coie firm, where Elias served as partner prior to launching his own firm. Both Neville and Elias departed Perkins Coie to launch their respective firms in 2021. 

Elias has increasingly positioned himself as a public figure on the topic of election law and, as evident by working with BLM, other social issues. He has appeared in numerous interviews and maintained a consistent social media presence. 

Last year, however, Elias deleted all tweets prior to April 4 without explanation. Around that time, federal investigators began to close in on those behind Russiagate. About a month before Elias purged his Twitter, the FEC fined the DNC and Clinton $113,000 for misrepresenting payments for opposition research used to create Russiagate. 

Biden’s former chief of staff and re-election campaign leader, Ron Klain, said that relations between Elias and Biden leaders remain amicable despite the split.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.

Provisional Ballot Analysis May Reverse Outcome Of Attorney General Race

Provisional Ballot Analysis May Reverse Outcome Of Attorney General Race

By Corinne Murdock |

“We have more votes than Kris Mayes. It’s up to the courts to decide to count them.” – Abe Hamadeh

Recent analysis of uncounted provisional ballots in November’s attorney general race make a compelling case that Abe Hamadeh received more legal votes than Kris Mayes.

The 2022 faceoff between Hamadeh and Mayes serves as one of the closest races in Arizona’s history. It’s on par with one other historically significant race that was ultimately overturned, even after both the Maricopa County Superior Court and a Democratic Secretary of State had declared a winner: the 1916 gubernatorial election. 

However, the year-long contention of that election had to do with the design of the ballots confusing voters on their vote. This time around, just over 100 years later, the issue concerned voters whose votes were denied to them due to government missteps and failures with election administration.

Last Tuesday, the Mohave County Superior Court granted Hamadeh oral arguments in his motion for a new trial challenging the outcome of his election based on hundreds of allegedly disenfranchised voters. That will occur in about a month, on May 16. Hamadeh shared that they have over 250 affidavits from allegedly disenfranchised voters at present. The vote margin difference is 280.

According to all counties’ data, there are roughly 8,000 provisional ballots outstanding. Hamadeh led on day-of voters statewide, winning an average of 70 percent of the votes. Provisional ballots may heavily favor him, due to the additional fact that day-of votes were generally 2 to 1 Republican. 

“All data points suggest that it favors Republicans,” said Hamadeh. 

It appears that, due to the mass tabulator failures, there were less voters but more provisional ballots cast this past election year. Rejection rates of these provisional ballots increased sharply across several counties: Santa Cruz County’s rejections increased from one out of the 117 provisional ballots cast to 83 out of the 139 provisional ballots cast. Pima County’s rejection rate doubled.

Despite Pinal County having a comparable number of provisional ballots cast in 2020 and 2022, their rejection rate increased from 59 to 63 percent. 

Yavapai County more than doubled its rejection of provisional ballots this past election than in 2020 based on non-registration, despite having a significant decline in voter turnout (over 87 percent versus just over 75 percent). 

Further data will be published in full as court proceedings continue. Hamadeh shared that his legal team is awaiting some data from several counties, which he said would bolster their case.

“As more data comes in, it’s getting worse for the government and looking better for us,” said Hamadeh.

Another development that could impact Hamadeh’s case is the divorce between Democrats’ top election lawyer, Marc Elias, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC). 

Elias is engaged in an ongoing federal lawsuit fighting for the voting rights of those voters whose registration was canceled. Elias is fighting for all provisional ballots to be counted — an outcome that would be favorable for Hamadeh’s case, when it was originally intended to be favorable to Democratic interests.

Hamadeh’s legal and analytics teams estimate that over 1,000 voters had their voter registration erroneously canceled due to government system issues. That’s separate from the 8,000 provisional ballots outstanding. 

Hamadeh’s team also discovered 750 high-propensity voters whose registrations were wrongly canceled. Of that number, only 176 showed up on Election Day.

“It’s really a screwed up situation,” said Hamadeh. “If you can imagine, the disenfranchisement is even bigger than what we’re arguing.”

Bureaucratic mismanagement resulting in voter registration failures is nothing new, especially for Maricopa County. In 2020, thousands of voters were nearly disenfranchised by intergovernmental miscommunication.

Hamadeh dismissed the argument from some outlets that high-propensity voters should’ve taken more steps to ensure they were registered, saying that doesn’t excuse the government’s failure. 

“If you’re on PEVL [Permanent Early Voting List] and you expect your ballot to come but it doesn’t, you’re disenfranchised,” said Hamadeh. 

Hamadeh referenced one case he called “egregious,” where a father paying his college daughter’s vehicle registration unknowingly had his registration transferred to a different county — all because his daughter was going to college in a different county. 

“Without any notice by the way, he never got any notice. And we know he never intended to go to Coconino because he doesn’t have a house there or anything,” said Hamadeh.

There was also the case of Howard, a visually-impaired disabled veteran whose voter registration was canceled through bureaucratic error, unbeknownst to him, and left him without his voting power in this last election. Hamadeh insisted that Democrats’ refusal to see Howard as the victim in this case was hypocritical. 

“The media and Democrats are trying to say this is voter error. But in every single election incident, just two years ago, they were arguing against these voter registration cancellations,” said Hamadeh.

Then there’s the 269 voters who showed up on election day with their mail-in ballot and checked in — but never had their vote counted. Yet, on the county’s end, those check-ins reflect votes cast. Of those 269 who dropped off mail-in ballots that weren’t counted, 149 were Republicans, 53 were Democrats, and 67 were “other.” Hamadeh reported that many of those voters told his team that their votes weren’t counted. 

With a 280 vote margin between Mayes and Hamadeh, any of these contested provisional or mail-in ballots may result in the first race overturned in nearly a century.

Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.