Arizona: Supreme Court voter ID case may shape the future | UPI

The fight over whether states can demand some sort of identification before allowing voters to cast ballots has finally reached the U.S. Supreme Court as the justices agreed to hear argument on Arizona’s law requiring voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship before registering. In the heat of the final days of the U.S. presidential election the case is not drawing much attention. Any argument and decision in the case won’t come until long after Election Day. And the arguments advanced by both sides in the case may seem as dry as unbuttered toast to the average American. The battle probably appeals mainly to political activists or Supreme Court wonks. But an eventual Supreme Court decision will help shape the voting landscape of the future.

Arizona: Spanish Voter ID Cards Give Incorrect Election Date | Fox News

The Arizona Democratic Party is calling for a meeting with the Maricopa County Recorder following yet another error in connection with the upcoming election. The wrong election date was printed on the mailer that comes with your voter ID that you punch out. The error was only made in Spanish, but some worry it will cause voters to show up on the wrong day. The recorder says it only affects a few dozen cards but others aren’t convinced it’s not more widespread. “We want to make sure no one’s vote is jeopardized in any way,” says Frank Camacho, Arizona State Democratic Party.

Arizona: High court to hear Arizona voter-registration case | Arizona Republic

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear arguments on Arizona’s law that requires people to show proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. The case involves Proposition 200, which voters approved in 2004, and adds to the election-related cases pending before the nation’s top court. In this case, state attorneys want the court to overturn an appeals-court ruling that has created a two-track system for voter registration: a state form that requires people to produce documents proving citizenship, and a federal form that requires no documents but instead requires people to attest they are citizens, under penalty of perjury. An individual can use either form to register to vote in Arizona elections.

Arizona: Fake write-in votes cost the county | Arizona Republic

If some voters had their way, Mickey Mouse would be an Arizona senator. And U.S. president. And a mayor. And on every local school board. Donald Duck, a close runner-up for all those races, likely would concede. Mickey has always been the front-runner among fake write-in candidates. Superheroes from Marvel comics are popular, too, along with other characters from box-office favorites around election time. Some voters write in their names, or names of friends or family members. Others go on rants about politics on the write-in line. While some may find it funny, Maricopa County elections officials aren’t laughing. Every write-in entry must be verified with the list of legitimate write-in candidates for that election, by a three-member review team. In the August primary election, Maricopa County elections officials saw the biggest ratio of fake-to-legitimate write-in candidates in recent memory: Among 90,433 entries in write-in slots, 1,738 were votes for legitimate write-in candidates. Each fake entry cost Arizona counties money and manpower and slowed down the tabulation process, said Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell, who oversees elections.

Arizona: Supreme Court to weigh Arizona voter registration case | Reuters

The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to consider whether Arizona can demand that voters show proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. The high court will not hear the case before the November 6 U.S. election, ensuring that the disputed registration requirement in Arizona will not be in effect. The legal dispute over the registration requirement dates back to 2004 when Arizona voters passed a ballot initiative, Proposition 200, designed to stop illegal immigrants from voting. The measure amended state election laws to require voters to show proof of citizenship to register to vote, as well as identification to cast a ballot at the polls. Arizona residents, Indian tribes and civil rights groups sued to challenge measure. The registration law requires voters to present “satisfactory evidence” of U.S. citizenship, including a driver’s license number, naturalization papers, U.S. birth certificate or passport. It is one of many measures nationwide championed by Republicans and put in place at the state level that Democrats say are intended to make it more difficult for certain voters who tend to vote Democratic to cast ballots.

Arizona: Fake write-in votes cost the county | Arizona Republic

If some voters had their way, Mickey Mouse would be an Arizona senator. And U.S. president. And a mayor. And on every local school board. Donald Duck, a close runner-up for all those races, likely would concede. Mickey has always been the front-runner among fake write-in candidates. Superheroes from Marvel comics are popular, too, along with other characters from box-office favorites around election time. Some voters write in their names, or names of friends or family members. Others go on rants about politics on the write-in line. While some may find it funny, Maricopa County elections officials aren’t laughing. Every write-in entry must be verified with the list of legitimate write-in candidates for that election, by a three-member review team. In the August primary election, Maricopa County elections officials saw the biggest ratio of fake-to-legitimate write-in candidates in recent memory: Among 90,433 entries in write-in slots, 1,738 were votes for legitimate write-in candidates. Each fake entry cost Arizona counties money and manpower and slowed down the tabulation process, said Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell, who oversees elections.

Arizona: Pima County readies its aged counting devices for election | azstarnet

The optical scanners that will be used to count Pima County votes in November’s general election were bought in the 1990s, when the technology was already old. “It’s like flying around in an old DC-7,” said Charles Geoffrion, chairman of the county’s Election Integrity Commission. He was referring to a 1950-60s’ era propeller airplane. The machines are being disassembled, cleaned and tested. Worn-out parts are being replaced with parts the county acquired by tracing the scanner supply chain. The original manufacturer no longer supplies them. Pima County Elections Department Director Brad Nelson hopes to buy new equipment next year, but he anticipates that the current scanners will be adequate for this election.

Arizona: Political parties united in dislike of Arizona’s top-two primaries | Mohave Daily News

They don’t agree on much, but a plan to create “top two” primaries has Arizona’s major and minor political parties on the same page – or at least close to it. Their responses range from outright opposition from Republican, Libertarian and Green leaders to noncommittal dislike from the Arizona Democratic Party. Proposition 121, dubbed the Open Elections/Open Government Act, would replace the current partisan primary system with a single primary that advances the top vote-getters regardless of party. The Open Government Committee, led by former Phoenix Mayor Paul Johnson, contends the change would produce more moderate candidates and increase primary election turnout.

Arizona: Voting violations claimed – Gila County recorder hit for using public resources to campaign | Payson Roundup

Gila County’s recorder is facing tough criticism from both a failed challenger and county supervisors. Although he lost the primary, former recorder candidate James “Mac” Feezor is still fighting. Feezor says he plans to file a formal complaint on what he calls “numerous incidents of misconduct on the part of the elections personnel, specifically in the recorder’s office.” Supervisor Shirley Dawson said she is also unhappy with the recorder, specifically her handling of voter registration on the San Carlos and White River Apache Reservations and her decision to shorten polling place hours. Dawson said she believes Sadie Jo Tomerlin, a Republican, did not want to collect those votes because they come primarily from Democratic voters.

Arizona: ‘Top 2′ primary can be on ballot, Arizona high court rules | Tucson Citizen

Voters will get a chance this fall to decide whether the state should replace its partisan-primary system with one in which all candidates would compete on a single ballot. The Arizona Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a hotly contested proposition to create a so-called top-two primary system can remain on the Nov. 6 ballot. The ruling came just one day before the hard deadline for printing the ballot, which will have nine propositions. The Open Elections/Open Government initiative, or Proposition 121, would change the current system — in which candidates are winnowed down through party primaries — to one in which all candidates for a given office appear on a single primary-election ballot. Party labels would be optional. The top-two finishers would then advance to the general election. The system would apply to all local, county, state and federal offices, except for presidential elections. Read the court’s ruling

Arizona: Last-ditch try in open-primary fight | Arizona Daily Star

Challengers to the state’s open primary system want another two hours to argue in court there are not enough valid signatures to put the measure on the ballot. Attorney Mike Liburdi told the Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday he was “cut off” on Thursday by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Rea in the middle of his arguments. He said Rea refused to give him more time even after initiative supporters finished early. “Given the magnitude of the controversy – a proposed constitutional amendment that will fundamentally change the manner in which public officers are elected – it was unreasonable and an abuse of discretion not to provide (challengers) with more time to present their case,” Liburdi argued to the high court.

Arizona: Judge: Arizona must accpet federal voter registration forms | YumaSun

A federal judge has given state and county election officials until the end of the month to finally comply with a court order to make sure that alternate voter registration forms are readily available – forms that do not require proof of citizenship. Judge Roslyn Silver rejected claims by Attorney General Tom Horne that all election officials need to do to comply with her order is accept the federal voter registration form if someone actually finds one and fills one out. Horne said the state has no obligation to actually provide those federal forms. Instead, the judge said the state and counties “shall ensure widespread distribution of the federal form through all reasonable channels.” And she said that, by the end of the month, election officials must make that form available “where they make the state form available, including websites.”

Arizona: Senate Candidate Jeff Flake Takes On The 17th Amendment | TPM

Jeff Flake, the Republican Arizona congressman who is running for U.S. Senate, would prefer if the voters of his state didn’t have the chance to cast a ballot for him this year. Instead, he said at a recent campaign stop, he wishes the Arizona legislature, which is dominated by a Republican super majority, would get to choose who represents the state in the Senate. Flake made the comments last week in response to a question at an event in Payson, Ariz. The local newspaper, the Payson Roundup, first noted the response on Friday. In doing so, Flake came out alongside hardcore Tea Party candidates who favor the repeal of the 17th Amendment, which was adopted in 1913 to let voters pick their senators. But even some Tea Party candidates have said repealing the amendment would be a step too far for them.

Arizona: DoJ and Arizona clash – again – this time over voter registration | East Valley Tribune

Arizona, already at odds with the federal government and civil-rights groups over immigration, is adding voter ID and the Voting Rights Act to the disputes. Arizona’s voter ID law, a portion of Proposition 200, was partially struck down in April by a federal appeals court that said the state can’t require proof of citizenship for people who use a federal form to register to vote. But the court said Arizona can continue to require proof of citizenship for those who register using a state form and the state can still require voters to show ID at the polls. Federal voter registration forms, which must be accepted in all 50 states, were created as part of a 1993 federal law meant to make voter registration easier. The federal motor voter law – so named because it allows registration upon renewing or applying for a driver’s license – does not require applicants to prove citizenship. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that states can require proof of citizenship for their own registration forms, but not for federal forms. Arizona is appealing the court ruling against its restrictive voter ID law, and the state plans to sue over the section of the Voting Rights Act that requires federal permission for any changes to state and local elections. Arizona has asked the Supreme Court to allow the state to require citizenship proof on federal registration forms.

Arizona: Judge blocks top-two initiative from Arizona ballot | Arizona Capitol Times

A Maricopa County Superior Court judge issued an injunction against the Open Elections/Open Government Act today, ruling that a provision on the election of political parties’ officers violates a rule requiring ballot initiatives to focus on a single subject. Judge Mark Brain ruled that the section on the rights of political parties should have been a separate amendment from the initiative, which aims to create a “top two” primary election system in Arizona. The provision on the rights of political parties states that the initiative does restrict the rights of individuals to associate with political parties, and that parties may still elect party officers, support candidates or otherwise participate in elections, but that “no such procedures shall be paid for or subsidized using public funds.” The provision would have eliminated taxpayer-funded elections for precinct committeemen. Paul Johnson, chairman of the Open Government Committee, said the group will appeal the ruling to the Arizona Supreme Court. He said the appeal will likely be filed on Tuesday.

Arizona: Judge not buying arguments by foes of open primary ballot measure | East Valley Tribune

A state judge on Friday questioned efforts of foes of an open primary system to keep it from ever going to voters. The opponents contend that the proposed constitutional amendment illegally deals with too many disparate subjects. Attorney Mike Liburdi said that makes putting it on the November ballot improper. But during a hearing Friday, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Mark Brain suggested he was not buying all of Liburdi’s arguments that the measure, if approved, would change too many unrelated things. Brain also was skeptical of Liburdi’s contention that a 100-word description of the measure, included on each petition, did not comply with legal requirements that it be solely a factual description of what would change if approved. The attorney argued that proponents improperly used the description to convince people to sign. But Brain told Liburdi that under his interpretation of the law, there is no way anyone could accurately describe a ballot measure within 100 words. Liburdi started to craft an answer when Brain interjected. “They would say that it sucked,” the judge joshed.

Arizona: Suit targets Arizona election measure | The Arizona Republic

A proposed constitutional amendment to create a new primary-election system violates the state’s single-subject rule and should not go before voters in November, a new lawsuit charges. The challenge to the Open Elections/Open Government effort comes from two Republicans, a Libertarian and the League of Women Voters of Arizona. In a filing in Maricopa County Superior Court, they allege the “top two” primary proposes multiple changes to the state’s election process, running afoul of the requirement that ballot measures propose only one substantive change. The filing marks the second time this month a high-stakes ballot issue faces a legal battle. Backers of a permanent 1-cent-per-dollar increase in the state sales tax to pay for education and construction projects are fighting to reinstate their measure on the Nov. 6 ballot. They head to court today. Secretary of State Ken Bennett disqualified the measure earlier this month, saying supporters did not follow proper procedures for filing and circulating their proposal.

Arizona: Governor Brewer nixes plan for election law special session | TriValley Central

Gov. Jan Brewer late Friday dropped a plan to hold a special session to present Arizona voters with a second ballot measure on proposed changes to election laws, according to a Brewer spokesman who said legislative leaders had changed their minds. Republican legislative leaders and Brewer earlier had agreed to hold a special session to consider a possible referendum that was a reaction to a recently filed initiative measure. The initiative measure would make major changes in how Arizona conducts primary elections. It will go on the November ballot if election officials determine that backers submitted enough petition signatures. Word of the planned special session surfaced earlier Friday, a day after initiative backers filed their petitions.

Arizona: GOP alternative to open primary initiative falls apart; Brewer lacks votes for special session | East Valley Tribune

Plans by Republicans to craft their own alternative to an open primary initiative blew apart late Friday as some party members balked. Matthew Benson, press aide to Gov. Jan Brewer, said his boss believes there is a key weakness in the proposal submitted Thursday to go on the November ballot: It would allow candidates to run for office without disclosing their party affiliation. Benson said letting people hide their true party affiliation would allow candidates to “game” the system. He said that could give a leg up to Democrats in heavily Republican areas like Mesa — and vice versa in Tucson — as many voters cast their ballots based largely on a candidate’s party. So Brewer was prepared to call a special session for this week to offer an alternative to the initiative, one that kept the essence of the “open primary” but with the disclosure requirement. But Sen. Frank Antenori, R-Tucson, said that was not the deal sought by many fellow GOP lawmakers. So they refused to go along, leaving the Brewer-preferred modification without the votes.

Arizona: ‘Jungle Primaries’ likely headed to fall election | azfamily.com

It looks like Arizona voters will get a shot at radically changing the way politics is played around here. A group that wants to abolish traditional partisan primary elections says they’ve got the support to put the question on the ballot this fall. Leaders of the Open Elections Open Government filed what they claim is a record number of petition signatures on Thursday afternoon with Arizona Secretary of State’s office. The organization needed a minimum of 259,213 signatures from registered voters to qualify for the November ballot. But a spokesman for the group says they’ve collected more than 356,000, a number they believe sets a new benchmark in Arizona.

Arizona: Secretary of State facing lawsuit after deciding to reject nearly 300,000 citizens’ initiative signatures | TriValley Central

The Quality Education and Jobs Committee last week filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court challenging Secretary of State Ken Bennett’s rejection of 290,849 signatures to qualify the citizens’ initiative for the Nov. 6 ballot. In its legal complaint against Bennett, the committee asked the court to overturn his decision, arguing that Bennett’s decision violates state law, legislative intent and the Arizona Constitution. The complaint, filed by former Arizona Chief Justice Stanley Feldman as the lead attorney, stated that Secretary Bennett, by rejecting the signatures, has “failed to perform a duty required by law as to which he has no discretion.” The committee asked for the case to be heard quickly because of election deadlines. “The motto of the Secretary of State’s Office is that Arizona voters’ voice and vote count,” said Ann-Eve Pedersen, chair of the Quality Education and Jobs citizens’ initiative. “For Secretary Bennett to now tell voters that their signatures don’t count and they won’t even have the chance to vote on a measure they overwhelmingly support erodes public confidence in government and in the democratic process.”

Arizona: Supreme Court declines to let Arizona require citizenship proof from voters | Tucson Sentinel

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for a lower court ruling that would stop Arizona election officials from rejecting voter registration forms that do not have evidence of citizenship. Arizona has been requiring proof of citizenship with voter registration forms since 2005, shortly after voters passed Proposition 200. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in April ruled that the proof-of-citizenship requirement conflicted with federal voter registration law. The Supreme Court had stayed that decision earlier this month at the request of Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, who was planning a challenge to the lower court decision. The justices Thursday, without comment, lifted that stay, clearing the way for the circuit court to issue an order banning the practice of requiring citizenship proof. That order is likely to come in the next week, said attorneys involved in the case.

Arizona: Supreme Court refuses to block ban on Arizona requirement for proof of citizenship for voter registration | Cronkite News

The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way Thursday for a lower court ruling that would stop Arizona election officials from rejecting voter registration forms that do not have evidence of citizenship. Arizona has been requiring proof of citizenship with voter registration forms since 2005, shortly after voters passed Proposition 200. But the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in April ruled that the proof-of-citizenship requirement conflicted with federal voter registration law. The Supreme Court had stayed that decision earlier this month at the request of Arizona Attorney General Thomas Horne, who was planning a challenge to the lower court decision. The justices Thursday, without comment, lifted that stay, clearing the way for the circuit court to issue an order banning the practice of requiring citizenship proof. That order is likely to come in the next week, said attorneys involved in the case.

Arizona: Supreme Court’s Split decision Keeps Issue Alive for November | Roll Call

The Supreme Court’s split decision on Arizona’s immigration law gave President Barack Obama an important legal victory Monday while upholding just enough of the statute to keep the issue alive as he pursues Latino voters in advance of the November election. Indeed, the president’s advantage on the issue was clear given that top Republicans either declined to respond or, in the case of presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, issued statements that vaguely supported states rights without commenting on the specifics of the tough Arizona law. The controversial “papers please” section of the law requiring police officers to try to ascertain the immigration status of people they suspect to be illegal immigrants was upheld, while the rest of the law adding state criminal penalties for immigration violations was gutted in a 5-3 ruling written by Justice Anthony Kennedy. With the states constrained, the onus is squarely on Congress to fix the nation’s immigration system, but nothing beyond partisan posturing is likely on that front before November.

Arizona: Citizenship mandate challenged | SCOTUSblog

Challengers to Arizona’s eight-year-old mandate that voters must prove that they are U.S. citizens before they may register to go to the polls argued Monday that the state has not offered any evidence that the requirement is necessary to prevent fraud in elections.   Urging the Supreme Court to leave undisturbed a Ninth Circuit Court decision striking down the citizenship rule, the opponents of Arizona’s “Proposition 200″ contended that a delay of that ruling will interfere with voting in this year’s elections and drive potential voters away from the polls.  Two responses to Arizona’s plea for postponement can be read here and here. The state’s voters approved the citizenship mandate in 2004, and its enactment has led to a continuing courthouse battle that has been to the Supreme Court once before, and even led to an earlier Ninth Circuit ruling against the requirement by retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, sitting temporarily as a federal appeals court judge.  Indeed, her name was invoked by the challengers as they sought to head off Arizona’s stay application (11A1189).

Arizona: Phoenix OKs redistricting map but still may consider an alternative | azcentral.com

The Phoenix City Council voted on a final redistricting plan Tuesday afternoon, but the fight over where to redraw new lines for council districts may not be over. District 6 City Councilman Sal DiCiccio said he wants elected officials to reconsider an alternative council district map he introduced at the meeting that slightly modifies the map the council adopted 8-1. He said he’ll ask for a reconsideration of the city’s redistricting plan, and the City Council ordered staff to run an analysis on DiCiccio’s alternative map. DiCiccio’s map proposes his district retain or lose certain voting precincts on the edges of his district, which covers the Biltmore, Arcadia and Ahwatukee Foothills areas.

Arizona: Voter ID law opponents ask Supreme Court to let lower court’s rejection stand | Arizona Capitol Times

Opponents of Arizona’s voter identification law asked the U.S. Supreme Court Monday to let a lower court decision take effect that would end the state’s requirement of proof of citizenship for voter registration. Justice Anthony Kennedy last week ordered a temporary stay of that ruling in response to state officials who said the decision, coming “on the eve of a new election cycle,” would have thwarted Arizona’s ability to “ensure fair federal elections.” Kennedy gave opponents of the law until Monday to file a response to the stay. Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne has until Wednesday to reply. Arizona has been requiring proof of citizenship since 2005, after the passage of Proposition 200. That law requires county recorders to reject any voter registrationform without proof of citizenship and it requires people to present identification when they show up to vote.

Arizona: Voter-ID Law Gets Temporary Pass From U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy | Phoenix News

In April, the U.S. Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a portion of Arizona’s voter-approved voter-ID law, intended to keep non-citizens from voting. Because of that ruling, Arizona was supposed to stop enforcing the law. But a new order by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy permits the law to go into effect — for the time being. Kennedy’s order comes in response to Arizona Solictor General David Cole’s motion on Wednesday that sought a stay to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling.

Arizona: State allowed to keep law that demands proof of citizenship for voter registration | East Valley Tribune

Arizona can continue to demand proof of citizenship before registering voters, at least for the time being.
In a brief order Thursday, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy blocked a ruling against the state from taking effect as scheduled Friday. Instead, he directed those who successfully challenged the requirement to file legal papers by the end of the day Monday explaining why the April decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should be upheld. It does not mean the high court intends to overturn the ruling — or even from preventing it from taking effect while the state seeks review. But it does mean that at least one justice thinks the issue is significant enough to require an immediate look by him and his colleagues.

Arizona: Delay in Arizona election case | SCOTUSblog

Justice Kennedy has issued a temporary order delaying the Ninth Circuit Court’s ruling, at least until further briefs are filed in the case.  The Circuit Court mandate was due to be issued tomorrow, but now will be delayed until at least next Wednesday afternoon.  The challengers to the Arizona citizenship proof requirement are to file a brief by Monday afternoon, with a state reply due by noon Wednesday.   Earlier today, this post was updated to provide a link to the application, here. Arizona state officials asked the Supreme Court on Wednesday to allow election officials there to demand that all voters show proof of citizenship before they may register to vote   The divided en banc Ninth Circuit Court ruled in April that the citizenship proof requirement conflicts with a 1993 federal law passed to make it easier for individuals to sign up to vote.  The state took its plea for a delay of that ruling, for the duration of this year’s election season, to Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who has the option of acting alone or referring the issue to his eight colleagues.  The application (11A1189) was filed in Arizona v. Gonzalez, et al.  The en banc Ninth Circuit, over three judges’ dissents, had denied a stay last week.