It is no secret that an overwhelming number of Americans believe that only U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in our elections. It arguably is and ought to be the first and primary qualification to vote. But what good is that requirement if it isn’t verified? In other words, without proof of citizenship, we are relying on a simple stroke of a pen or pencil on a registration form, checking a small box attesting to citizenship.
That’s why in 2004 Arizona voters approved a measure to require proof of citizenship before registering to vote. But, in the 20 years since, that requirement has been whittled away and now there are tens of thousands of people voting in Arizona elections (often referred to as “Federal only” voters) without ever having provided evidence of their citizenship.
In response to this explosion of ‘Federal Only’ voters, the Arizona legislature passed two landmark bills, HB2492 and HB2243, to require proof of citizenship and regular, enhanced voter roll maintenance to ensure only eligible individuals are registering and voting in our elections.
What happened next shouldn’t surprise anyone that has watched the left fight every reasonable voter integrity measure around the country. As soon as both bills were signed into law, a dozen liberal organizations and the Biden Justice Department sued in federal court, claiming that the measures were unconstitutional, illegal, and (of course) racist.
The case was given to Bill Clinton appointed judge Susan Bolton, and after a year of litigation, she issued a confusing, disjointed two-part ruling that is destined for appeal. And while a few positives can be gleaned from the decision, the bad and ugly from the liberal opinion far outweighed the good…
A ballot referral to help protect Arizona business owners from degrading landscapes outside their front doors will be considered by state voters thanks to the efforts of legislators.
The Arizona Senate President, Warren Petersen, and Speaker of the House Ben Toma introduced HCR 2023 / SCR 1006, which would “allow a property owner to apply for a primary property tax refund if the owner documents expenses caused by a city, town or county adopting a policy, pattern or practice which declines to enforce existing laws or the maintaining of a public nuisance” – according to the overview provided by the state House.
In a statement after the successful passage of the bill out of his chamber, Petersen said, “There are instances where local governments routinely and repeatedly fail their citizens by not enforcing laws. An example of this would be the City of Phoenix’s handling of the former homeless encampment known as ‘The Zone.’ This area was not only a public safety and public health disaster for those who camped there, but it was also a detriment to the livelihoods of small business owners who set up their shops in the area.”
President Petersen added, “Money talks, and as a way to encourage municipalities to enforce the law, Speaker Toma and I teamed up to sponsor HCR 2023/SCR 1006. This measure is a ballot referral that would protect law-abiding citizens. If approved by voters, property owners would be allowed to request a refund for expenses incurred to mitigate the problem, up to the amount of their property tax liability. The funds would be deducted from the local government’s state shared revenue.”
The chamber’s president also noted that “all Senate Democrats voted ‘no’” on the referral.
At the end of February, the Arizona House approved the referral with a 31-28 vote (with one vacant seat). The Arizona Senate then passed the measure with a 16-12 vote (with two members not voting). The referral was then transmitted to the Arizona Secretary of State to be placed on the November General Election ballot.
Representatives from Barry Goldwater Institute for Public Policy Research, QuikTrip, Arizona Free Enterprise Club, Arizona Chamber of Commerce, Arizona Food Marketing Alliance, and the National Federation of Independent Business, indicated their support for the proposal on the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak system. Representatives from the League of Arizona Cities & Towns, Living United for Change in Arizona, Arizona Coalition to End Sexual and Domestic Violence, Professional Fire Fighters of Arizona, Arizona Association of Counties, County Supervisors Association of Arizona, Arizona Housing Coalition, and several state cities and towns, signed in to oppose the measure.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Arizona Republican Legislators were on the winning side of a unanimous decision at the U.S. Supreme Court.
On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the opinion from the Colorado State Supreme Court that “ordered the Colorado secretary of state to exclude the former President from the Republican primary ballot in the State and to disregard any write-in votes that Colorado voters might cast for him.” The Court unanimously ruled that “the judgement of the Colorado Supreme Court cannot stand” – though two concurring opinions (one by Justice Barrett and one by Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson) gave additional thoughts and context to the deliberations from the panel.
The decision from the nation’s high court follows an amicus brief that was submitted from more than two dozen state attorneys general and the Arizona Legislature under the leadership of Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma. That brief urged the U.S. Supreme Court to consider that “dangerous ruling out of Colorado.”
After the news of the 9-0 decision was announced, the Arizona Senate Republicans Caucus “X” account posted, “Colorado got it wrong. President Warren Petersen and the Arizona Legislature are proud to have supported President Donald Trump by filing a brief with more than two dozen other states. Today the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with us and unanimously overturned Colorado’s attempt to disenfranchise voters by keeping President Trump off the ballot.”
Colorado got it wrong.
President @votewarren and the Arizona Legislature are proud to have supported President Donald Trump by filing a brief with more than two dozen other states.
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with us and unanimously overturned Colorado's attempt to… pic.twitter.com/j2C9TRdsRi
When the Legislature joined the amicus brief in the lead-up to the arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court, Petersen had said, “This is clearly a case of judicial activism and a violation of the separation of powers. Leftist bias and prejudice are on full display from the Colorado Supreme Court.” His press release asserted that the U.S. Constitution “reserve[d] the power to determine the political question of what constitutes an ‘insurrection’ to Congress – not rogue courts.”
The Petersen and Toma-led legislature has been active in joining legal fights around the nation and in-state – especially in the absence of an attorney general who is not generally favorable to Republicans’ perspectives of different cases.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
If Adrian Fontes likes spending time in court, he’s going to have a fun time in 2024. In case you’ve lost count, Arizona’s Secretary of State has been sued three times over his Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) in just the last two weeks. That’s what happens when you produce one of the most radical EPMs in Arizona’s history.
At the end of January, Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed a lawsuit against Fontes over a variety of provisions in his EPM that violate or conflict with current election laws in our state. But the party was just getting started.
Last week, the Arizona Republican Party, the Republican National Committee, and the Yavapai County GOP also sued Fontes for his blatant attempt to rewrite election law through his EPM. And on the same day, we filed our own lawsuit against Fontes over the promulgation of certain unlawful rules set forth in his EPM.
The reality is that, in his role as Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes is supposed to provide an EPM that gives impartial direction to county recorders to ensure uniform and correct implementation of election law. Instead, he prescribed certain rules without the power to do so and moved forward with an EPM that contains several “rules” that are unconstitutional.
On Monday, the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus announced that President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma had filed a lawsuit against the Biden Administration’s “unlawful, dictator-style land grab last summer in northern Arizona.” The challenge, which “attempts to reverse Biden’s confiscation of nearly a million acres of land within Coconino and Mohave Counties,” was launched in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
🚨FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: President @votewarren Leads Coalition in Legal Battle Against Joe Biden's Unlawful, Dictator-Style Land Grab in Arizona
Back in August 2023, President Joe Biden visited Arizona to establish the Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni – Ancestral Footprints of the Grand Canyon National Monument. In his signed proclamation, Biden stated, “Protecting the areas to the northeast, northwest, and south of the Grand Canyon will preserve an important spiritual, cultural, prehistoric, and historic legacy; maintain a diverse array of natural and scientific resources; and help ensure that the prehistoric, historic, and scientific value of the areas endures for the benefit of all Americans.”
“This federal confiscation promises to wreak havoc on our local and state economies, jeopardize the livelihoods of our citizens, and compromise national security, all in an attempt to score cheap political points with radical environmentalists,” said President Petersen. “Biden’s maneuver is incredibly disingenuous, as it has nothing to do with protecting actual artifacts. Instead, it aims 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.”
Petersen highlighted the lack of defense against Biden’s executive overreach from the state’s Democrat attorney general, which has been a common refrain from legislative Republicans over the past few months. He said, “Needless to say, I’m incredibly disappointed our Attorney General has once again failed to carry out the duties of her office in defending our state against this reckless federal overreach and is instead showing her complicity with Biden’s extremist agenda. Nonetheless, we look forward to prevailing in court and for the president’s abuse of power to be reined in.”
Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee, another Republican, also joined in the lawsuit. According to a press release sent from her office, Yee signed on “as she is responsible for the receipt and investment of all revenue from Arizona state trust land.”
I am suing the Biden Administration for violation of the Antiquities Act. Biden's unlawful land grab will directly affect our economy and the livelihoods of our citizens by devaluing state trust lands. It must be stopped.
— Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee (@AZTreasurerYee) February 12, 2024
In a statement that accompanied her announcement, Yee said, “We must protect the value of state trust lands for the future of Arizona. This unlawful land grab by the Biden Administration will directly affect Arizona’s economy and the livelihoods of our citizens. The Federal Government needs to compensate the permanent school fund for the tens of thousands of trust land parcels left economically isolated by the stroke of the pen by President Biden. This big hand of government will hurt our K-12 education beneficiaries the most.”
Yee added, “The suit affirms that Congress passed the Antiquities Act to protect just that: antiquities. It did not pass the law to allow the Biden Administration to declare every inch of federal land a monument.”
Mohave County and the towns of Colorado City and Fredonia also joined the Arizona Legislature and the Treasurer’s Office in the lawsuit.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
