by Matthew Holloway | May 16, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, House Speaker Steve Montenegro, and State Treasure Kimberly Yee are continuing a legal battle against the administration of former President Joe Biden and his surrogate, Attorney General Kris Mayes to defeat what they say is an “unlawful, dictator-style land grab in northern Arizona.”
The lawsuit, currently before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, centers around the confiscation of a massive tract of Arizona land in Coconino and Mohave Counties which bans “the productive use of almost 1 million acres in northern Arizona,” and “permanently entombs one of the nation’s largest and highest-grade uranium deposits,” in addition to forbidding any road or infrastructure development in “an area the size of Rhode Island,” according to a legal brief submitted Wednesday.
The Biden White House, via Presidential Proclamation launched this audacious expropriation of Arizona land in August 2023 under the color of the Antiquities Act, creating “the Ancestral Footprints Monument.” In February 2024, Petersen launched a lawsuit to stop him.
“Former President Joe Biden and his army of radical bureaucrats abused their constitutional authority on countless levels during his failed administration. Their infatuation with locking up federal lands from productive uses is a prime example of the harm inflicted on states like Arizona,” said Petersen. “As we have argued throughout this case, Biden’s maneuver had nothing to do with protecting actual artifacts. This was an attempt to halt all mining, ranching, and other local uses of federal lands that are critical to our energy independence from adversary foreign nations, our food supply, and the strength of our economy. Republicans in the Arizona Legislature will continue to fight these actions to free our state from the grasp radical environmentalists had over the previous administration. Thankfully, we now have President Donald J. Trump in office, who has a consistent track record of safeguarding state sovereignty and promoting common-sense uses of federal land. I am continuing to work with his administration in an effort to end this legal battle.”
As Petersen and his legal team point out to the court, the unlawful seizure by the Biden administration stood in direct violation of the 1909 Antiquities Act. It uses as a basis given that a president is only empowered to reserve “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”
In a press release, the Republican group said the coalition assembled to oppose Biden’s act of illegal seizure asserts that Biden failed to follow the law, “and the guardrails Congress established to create a check on the president’s power were violated.”
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 Jonathan Eberle | May 4, 2025 | News
By Jonathan Eberle |
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen announced Wednesday that the state legislature has joined a coalition of 20 states in support of Idaho’s voter ID law, which prohibits the use of student IDs when registering to vote or casting a ballot. The move comes as the law faces an appeal in federal court.
The coalition, led by Arizona and Montana, filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of March for Our Lives Idaho v. Phil McGrane. The brief defends Idaho’s authority to establish its own voter identification requirements under the U.S. Constitution.
The challenged Idaho law, enacted in 2023, was designed to tighten election security by limiting acceptable forms of voter identification. Student IDs from high schools and higher education institutions are no longer valid under the new law. Two advocacy groups, including March for Our Lives, sued to block the measure, arguing it disproportionately impacts young voters. Although a lower court dismissed the case, it is now being appealed.
In their legal brief, the 20-state coalition argues there is no evidence the law violates the 26th Amendment, which prohibits age-based discrimination in voting rights. The states contend that Idaho’s law does not intentionally target young voters and that legislatures have broad constitutional authority to prevent election fraud before it occurs.
“Every state has an absolute right to implement voter ID laws through its legislature,” said Senate President Petersen. “Arizona has been at the forefront of this movement to ensure the integrity of our elections through voter ID requirements. Prevention is better than prosecution.”
Petersen emphasized that states should not be required to wait for fraud to occur before taking preventative steps. He praised Idaho’s approach and affirmed Arizona’s commitment to maintaining strict election standards.
Voter ID laws have been a source of national debate, with supporters saying they protect election integrity and opponents claiming they can disenfranchise voters, particularly younger and marginalized communities. Legal challenges continue to test how far states can go in setting identification rules without violating federal protections.
The Ninth Circuit Court’s decision in the Idaho case could have broader implications for other states with similar laws or those considering tightening voter ID requirements. No date has been set for oral arguments in the appeal.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 1, 2025 | News
By Staff Reporter |
Earlier this week, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled against two Arizona laws requiring proof of citizenship to vote: HB 2243 and HB 2492.
HB2243 was passed in 2022 and signed by then-Governor Ducey to authorize birthplace disclosure and county recorders to authenticate a voter’s citizenship based on “reason to believe” the voter may not be a citizen.
HB2492 was also passed in 2022 and signed by then-Governor Ducey to enhance the legal guardrails of the Arizona voter registration process, ensuring that proof of citizenship is required to ensure only U.S. citizens are voting in our elections.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) called the ruling “outrageous and unprecedented” in a press release.
Scot Mussi, AFEC President, accused the Ninth Circuit Court of partisanship. Mussi expressed hope that the Supreme Court would take on the case and overrule the circuit court.
“It’s clear this circuit court panel is motivated by radical ideology, and not the impartial judgment of the law,” said Mussi. “After months of legal wrangling over this law, and clear guidance from the nation’s high court, the Ninth Circuit still wrongly believes that it is the final arbiter of the U.S. Constitution and our laws. This ruling will continue to sow doubt into our system of government and will cost much more in taxpayer dollars thanks to the emergency appeal that will be again filed at the U.S. Supreme Court.”
HB 2492 was authored by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club and passed by the Arizona Legislature in 2022 to stop non-U.S. citizens from registering to vote and casting ballots in our state. Previously, a panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit allowed Arizona officials to reject state voter registration forms without proof of citizenship, which was part of the intent and purpose of the law in question. Yet, another panel on the same appeals court inexplicably overturned this order, vacating enforcement of the law concerning state voter registration forms, leading to an emergency appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court quickly overruled the Ninth Circuit’s order, allowing the provision on proof of citizenship for state voters to go into effect. This was the last court action in this case until the latest surprising decision by the Ninth Circuit.
Those involved in the lawsuit included pro-illegal immigrant activist organizations Poder Latinx and Chicanos Por La Causa.
In a press release announcing their victory, Poder Latinx executive director Yadira Sanchez claimed HB2492 amounted to voter suppression and enabled racial discrimination.
“Arizona’s ‘reason to believe’ policy was a clear attempt to suppress naturalized citizens by subjecting them to discriminatory scrutiny. This ruling affirms that no voter should be treated as less American based on where they were born,” said Sanchez. “While this is a step toward a fairer electoral system, voter suppression tactics continue to evolve, targeting communities of color and immigrants. Poder Latinx remains committed to our mission to ensure that every eligible voter has the opportunity to make their voice heard and fully participate in our democracy, and to fight any effort to silence our communities.”
Joseph Garcia, vice president at Chicanos Por La Causa, expressed a general opposition to restrictions on voting.
“This is a victory for the voters,” said Garcia. “We must make voting more accessible, not arbitrarily more difficult. It’s simple: Everyone who is eligible to register to vote should be allowed to register and vote.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Paul Parisi | Aug 19, 2024 | Opinion
By Paul Parisi |
A modern-day example of voter integrity is the picture of an Iraqi woman holding up her finger colored in purple indelible ink, indicating that she voted. In 2005, an Iraqi woman posed for an iconic picture after leaving a polling station in Southern Iraq in the country’s first free election in over a half-century. She did so in defiance of deadly suicide bombings and mortar strikes at polling stations.
The recorded history of democracy dates back to the 5th century in ancient Greece. The word democracy is derived from two Greek words – demos, which means people and kratos, which means rule. In the first elections in Athens, only the ruling class could vote.
Even though the United States of America is a democratic country, the path to “one person, one vote” has been a checkered one. In 1789, when the US Constitution was ratified, most states only allowed white landowners to vote.
The 15th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1870, gave Black men the right to vote. It wasn’t until 1920 when the 19th Amendment was passed that women in all states were allowed to vote. The passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 put teeth in prohibiting racial discrimination when voting.
Though we have come a long way since the concept of democracy was born, voter integrity is still on the forefront. The recent phenomena of widespread mail-in ballots have created a whole new potential of voter fraud. Ballot harvesting, which is legal in many states, puts the concept of the secret ballot into question. Is the person filling out the ballot actually the person registered to vote?
Congress has recently passed the Safeguard American Voters Eligibility Act (SAVE). This bill is waiting to be heard in the Senate. The act requires that all people registering to vote provide proof of citizenship in federal elections. Though it’s already against the law for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, the National Voter Eligibility Act of 1993 prohibits states from confirming citizenship status in federal elections.
On August 1, 2024, the 9th Circuit Court put a stay on a recent Arizona law that required showing proof of citizenship in all elections including federal. In 2020, 11,600 individuals voted in Arizona on federal only ballots without showing proof of citizenship. The 9th Circuit Court decision is now being appealed to the US Supreme Court.
With the recent influx of undocumented individuals entering the United States, the importance of citizens only voting is a front burner issue that the SAVE Act might resolve. Just showing ID when registering to vote and casting your ballot at the polls will bring back a level of confidence in our elections.
With stronger legislation addressing voter integrity, Americans may have even more trust in our elections—akin to the Iraqis proudly holding up their purple-stained fingers.
Paul Parisi is the Arizona Grassroots Director for Our America.
by Daniel Stefanski | Aug 5, 2024 | News
By Daniel Stefanski |
A federal appeals court’s decision to overturn an order from its own panel has Arizona conservatives outraged.
This week, a panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a recent opinion from another panel within the court that had allowed Arizona’s law on state voter registration proof of citizenship requirements to go into effect. This latest decision from the Ninth Circuit now vacates that order, allowing individuals to essentially register to vote with state or federal forms in Arizona without providing proof of citizenship.
Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen, who was one of the intervenors in the case defending the law against its challengers, issued a statement in condemnation of the Ninth Circuit’s order. Petersen said, “This is just another example of why the radical Ninth Circuit is one of the most overturned circuits in the nation. They routinely engage in judicial warfare to carry out their extremist liberal agenda that’s contrary to the laws our citizens elected us to implement. We will seek assistance from the Supreme Court to ensure only American citizens are voting in our elections. If this principle is not followed, democracy as we know it, and as our Founding Fathers intended, is in jeopardy.”
According to the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus, “This lawsuit stems from radical Left activists, some of which are from outside of Arizona, opposing two laws passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature back in 2022 restricting voters who don’t provide documentation confirming they are in fact legal citizens of the United States.”
Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, also weighed in on the decision from the Ninth Circuit panel, writing, “This opinion from two radical judges on the Ninth Circuit is a travesty of law and to the legal process, overturning a ruling issued just last week by the same court. We are hopeful that the U.S. Supreme Court will quickly intervene and reverse this poorly reasoned decision on appeal.”
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club was extremely instrumental in the origination and passage of HB 2492, which is one of the state laws at the heart of the legal matter.
In this Ninth Circuit’s order, there was one judge who dissented from his other colleagues – Judge Patrick J. Bumatay. He wrote, “Motions for reconsideration of a motions panel’s order are not meant to be a second bite at the apple. On the contrary, they are highly irregular and strongly disfavored, primarily appropriate if there have been ‘[c]hanges in legal or factual circumstances’ since the motions panel addressed the issue.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
