A Senate panel voted late Monday to require all ballots be counted by hand, despite the concession by one Republican who supported it that it just can’t be done. The action by the Government Committee came after various people testified about what they contend was fraud in the 2020 election when the official tally showed more Arizonans voted for Joe Biden than Donald Trump. Many Republicans have refused to accept the results despite the fact that various claims of irregularities have either been debunked outright or failed to gather corroborating evidence. House Bill 2289 is a grab-bag of proposed changes to election laws, but there are two key provisions. One would eliminate the opportunity of most Arizonans to cast early ballots, despite the fact that nearly 90% of those who voted in 2020 used that option. Instead, that right would be reserved for those who are in hospitals, nursing homes and those who would be out of state on Election Day. Sen. J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, said he has no problem with that. He has questioned the on-demand early voting that has been the law in Arizona since 1991, saying it doesn’t have the kind of checks that occur when someone shows up at the polls and has to present identification. Instead, current law requires only that the person sign the outside of the ballot envelope, with that signature compared with others the county election officials have on file. But Mesnard said he is having real heartburn with the other key provision: Having all ballots counted by hand, at each polling place, within 24 hours of the polls being closed at 7 p.m.
National: Contentious Fringe Legal Theory Could Reshape State Election Laws | Matt Vasilogambros/Stateline
The U.S. Supreme Court this month left open the possibility that it could endorse a fringe conservative legal theory that would give state legislatures unchecked powers over election rules before the 2024 presidential election. Republican officials cited the theory, which asserts that state courts do not have jurisdiction over election policy, in two key cases filed in North Carolina and Pennsylvania over congressional maps selected by their highest courts. Groups in those states—which included voters, Republican state senators and representatives, an election official and a congressional candidate—petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out the respective maps. They argued in federal court filings that the U.S. Constitution gives state legislatures the sole power to set rules for federal elections. The high court rejected emergency requests to block the maps, allowing the ones chosen by state courts to stay in place for the 2022 midterm elections. But in a dissent to the North Carolina decision, three conservative justices endorsed the theory known as the “independent state legislature doctrine,” while another signaled he wanted to formally consider the question. That means there appears to be enough votes to put the issue—and the possible legitimization of the doctrine—on the court’s 2023 calendar.
Full Article: Contentious Fringe Legal Theory Could Reshape State Election Laws | The Pew Charitable Trusts