Republicans Celebrate U.S. Supreme Court Win In Voter Registration Case

Republicans Celebrate U.S. Supreme Court Win In Voter Registration Case

by | Aug 24, 2024 | News

By Daniel Stefanski |

Arizona Republicans scored a significant victory for election integrity at the U.S. Supreme Court this week.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its order in Mi Familia v. Adrian Fontes, overruling a panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that had struck down portions of a recently passed state law that required new voters registering with state forms to provide proof of citizenship in order to vote. The law was HB 2492, which was passed in 2022.

“Our legal battle is far from over,” said Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen. “While we’re grateful SCOTUS recognized our state’s sovereignty by allowing our laws requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote in Arizona be enforced, individuals who are living here illegally are still able to register on a federal form without providing proof of citizenship. They must only attest they are lawful citizens, then they are able to vote in the presidential and congressional races, as well as by mail, thus influencing the outcome of our elections. We will continue litigating this issue in the coming months with a goal of ensuring only legal U.S. citizens are casting a ballot.”

The emergency petition to the U.S. Supreme Court from Petersen and Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma followed a mixed – and rather unprecedented – ruling at the Ninth Circuit. Last month, a panel on the court issued an order in support of the Arizona law’s requirement for proof of citizenship in state voter registrations. However, another panel on the same appeals court overturned this ruling, giving anyone in the state the ability to register to vote on a state form without first proving their citizenship.

“This is a great day for election integrity and transparency across Arizona,” said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club. “The U.S. Supreme Court rightly realized that the Ninth Circuit had created mass chaos of the law and precedent just a few months before the November General Election, and that this mess could not have been cleaned up after the fall contests. Today, Arizona will be able to protect our elections from illegals voting thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court. We will continue to fight against efforts from liberal special interests to dismantle these commonsense and constitutional laws requiring proof of citizenship to vote in our elections in the Ninth Circuit and look forward to all of the provisions being eventually upheld!”

RNC Chairman Michael Whatley stated: “This is a major victory for election integrity that upholds a simple principle: American elections must be decided by American citizens. While Democrats have worked to undermine basic election safeguards and make it easier for non-citizens to vote, we have fought tooth and nail to preserve citizenship requirements, see the law enforced, and secure our elections. The Supreme Court has sided with the RNC, and the American people, to protect the vote in November.”

According to information provided by the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, “Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch would have granted the application in full, allowing Arizona to not only reject state forms without proof of citizenship, but also prevent Federal Only Voters from voting for President and by mail; while Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, Barrett, and Jackson would have denied the application in full. Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kavanaugh agreed with Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch that Arizona may reject state voter registration forms without proof of citizenship.”

Democrats were not at all jubilant about the order from the nation’s high court. The “X” account for the Arizona Senate Democrats posted, “TODAY: The US Supreme Court ruled that part of the Republican-backed voting law will apply prospectively to new registrations. Arizona Republicans have proudly touted that they have a new ultra-conservative court appointed to uphold their conspiracy-filled ideas – this is nothing but their latest blow to democracy.”

The Arizona House Democrats’ “X” account added, “Today’s 5-4 Supreme Court emergency stay limiting federal only voter registrations without proof of citizenship (beyond swearing under penalty of perjury and providing last 4 digits of SSN) could impact up to 42k Arizona voters. Who are these voters? According to VoteBeat, they are overwhelmingly young and concentrated on college campuses (typically students who register but didn’t bring a birth certificate or passport to campus), disproportionately Hispanic, 52.6% independent, 28.8% Democratic & 14.6% Republican. They also include many naturalized citizens and Indigenous Arizonans who may never have had a birth certificate. The demographic makeup of these voters and the GOP’s intense efforts to disenfranchise them are not coincidental.”

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.

Arizona Women Continue Defense Of Girls’ Sports

Arizona Women Continue Defense Of Girls’ Sports

by | Oct 10, 2023 | News

By Daniel Stefanski |

Concerned Arizonans continue to take action to defend the future of women’s sports in their state.

Last month, the Arizona Women of Action filed an amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Doe v. Horne. This case concerns a challenge to the Arizona’s Save Women’s Sports Act, which was passed by the state legislature in 2022 and signed into law by former Governor Doug Ducey.

Kim Miller, the Founder and Director of Arizona Women of Action, said, “On behalf of Arizona parents and their student-athlete daughters, Arizona Women of Action strongly supports the Save Women’s Sports Act to ensure the safety and level playing field of female athletics. The facts and statistics don’t lie – the differences between males and females are real, even before puberty, and AZWOA stands with Superintendent Tom Horne and the Arizona Legislators to protect women’s sports here in Arizona.”

In their brief, the Arizona Women of Action make three arguments for the west coast appeals court to consider. First, that “the Arizona Legislature’s findings were thorough and based on sound evidence.” Second, that “the Arizona Legislature enacted the Save Women’s Sports Act for a legitimate purpose and to address a real problem.” And finally, that “the District Court improperly ignored the harm to biological females when biological males participate in girls’ sports.”

Earlier this summer, District Court Judge Jennifer Zipps granted a preliminary injunction against SB 1165, the Save Women’s Sports Act, which blocked the law from going into effect. At that time, Arizona’s Republican Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Horne, the defendant in the case, promised to appeal the ruling, saying, “This will ultimately be decided by the United States Supreme Court, and they will rule in our favor. The Plaintiffs in this case claimed that this only involves pre-pubescent boys, but we presented peer-reviewed studies that show pre-pubescent boys have an advantage over girls in sports. The only expert presented by the Plaintiffs was a medical doctor who makes his money doing sex transition treatments on children and who has exactly zero peer-reviewed studies to support his opinion.”

Joining Horne as defendants in the case are Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, who have actively filed motions throughout the proceedings at both the District and Appeals Court levels. In a recent motion to the Ninth Circuit, the Republican legislative leaders wrote, “Under the district court’s preliminary injunction order, ‘the [Save Women’s Sports] Act shall not prevent Plaintiffs from participating in girls’ sports’ and ‘Plaintiffs shall be allowed to play girls’ sports at their respective schools.’ Any success by Plaintiffs in try-outs and meets will displace biological girls from making a team, getting playing time, and succeeding in final results. Biological girls will be irreparably harmed if they are displaced by, forced to compete against, or risk injury from Plaintiffs.”

According to Arizona Women of Action, “the district court still has not ruled on (their) Motion to Intervene,” which was filed in June. The amicus brief before the Ninth Circuit lists three parent representatives – Anna Van Hoek, Lisa Fink, and Amber Zenczak. All three ladies have daughters who play sports, which, per the legal filing, means that they are “directly affected by the presence of biological males on girls’ sports teams.” Fink and her daughter shared their belief “that a biological male on their team would have an unfair advantage to be able to get a starting position on the team and achieve similar benefits and advantages. This would create an environment on the team of disunity and corrosive rivalry. Furthermore, if biological males were allowed to play on competing teams, those teams would have an unfair advantage. It would create a strong sense that the competition was not on a level playing field.”

The group’s bio outlines its purpose, which “is to revive the American dream of strong families, safe cities, and thriving kids, with a focus on citizen action in the areas of education, community, life, anti-trafficking and prayer.”

Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.