Arizona: Redistricting maps challenged by lawsuits | Arizona Republic

Arizona's contentious redistricting process heated up again with the filing Friday of a pair of Republican-backed lawsuits challenging new congressional and legislative districts approved by a state commission. Each lawsuit asked a court to declare one of the maps unconstitutional and to order the state's redistricting commission to draw a replacement map for use in elections after this year. However, the lawsuit challenging the legislative districts asked that a three-judge panel of federal judges draw an interim legislative map for use in this year's elections. The suit filed in state court to challenge the map of nine U.S. House districts doesn't ask for an interim map.

Arizona: U.S. Justice Department signs off on district maps | Arizona Republic

The U.S. Department of Justice approved Arizona's new legislative map Thursday, making official what most candidates are already taking for granted. The approval marks the first time in four decades that Arizona's legislative map has won Justice Department approval on the first submission, according to attorneys for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission. The agency had no objections to the map, which the commission approved in January. It creates 30 new legislative districts across the state to reflect population shifts over the past decade. Most candidates eyeing a seat in the Legislature have already relied on the new map as they have declared their intentions to run.

Arizona: State heading back to Supreme Court over voter ID law | New York Amsterdam News

The state of Arizona wants the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the appeal by the federal government of a law that would allow them to practice their own enforcement regarding immigrants. Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld Arizona’s requirement that voters show identification at the polls, but disallowed the requirement to show proof of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote in federal elections. Known as SB 1070, the law, if overturned by the court, would allow Arizona’s law enforcement officials to arrest and detain individuals who might be undocumented immigrants without any federal oversight or regard for federal priorities. Under the law, failure to comply with registration requirements would result in an inability to vote in elections.

Arizona: Ruling on voter requirement mixed – will be appealed to Supreme Court | azcentral.com

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has struck down Arizona's 2004 voter-approved requirement that residents show proof of citizenship when they register to vote -- at least on federal registration forms. The state can still require proof from voters submitting a state registration form, which is typically the form voters get from their county recorder's offices and through the Motor Vehicle Division's website. The 11-judge "en banc" appeals-court panel on Tuesday upheld the portion of the law requiring voters to show identification at the polls. Attorney General Tom Horne said he would appeal the portion of the law the panel overturned to the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Sandra S. Ikuta, who wrote in the majority opinion, said the Constitution requires the court to "safeguard" certain federal powers, including regulating federal elections. Among its provisions, the National Voter Registration Act creates a standard federal registration form that all states must accept. It requires applicants to sign a statement that they are citizens, but it does not require them to show proof.

Arizona: Court Upholds Voter ID Law, Strikes Down Proof of Citizenship Requirement | Fox News

Arizona has racially polarized voting and discriminated against Latinos, but a voter identification law did not disenfranchise Hispanics, a Court of Appeals ruled. A 12-member panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a law that required voters to show ID before casting their ballots, ruling it didn’t give Latinos less opportunity to vote. The court, however, struck down a critical provision of the law, known as Proposition 200,  that required that voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. The court ruled the federal National Voter Registration Act trumps that section of the Arizona law.   MALDEF, a Latino civil rights organization, one of the organizations that challenged the 2004 law, hailed the decision.

Arizona: Appeals court upholds Arizona’s requirement that people show identification before they can vote | AP/The Republic

An appeals court upheld a requirement in a 2004 Arizona law that voters show identification before they can cast ballots. The court says there wasn't evidence that the mandate disparately affected Latinos as the challengers of rules had alleged. A 12-member panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals says in a ruling Tuesday that there was evidence Arizona has racially polarized voting and a history of discrimination against Latinos.

Arizona: Election for Giffords’ seat a mercurial race | The Arizona Republic

The hasty race to fill Gabrielle Giffords’ former seat in Congress has set up a contest between her chosen Democratic successor and a mix of Republican candidates that could help to augur the outcome of other toss-up races throughout Arizona and the nation. The district that covers part of Tucson, Sierra Vista and a section of the U.S.-Mexico border is nearly split between Republicans and Democrats. Now, with a primary on Tuesday, candidates are scrambling to lock up the rest of their support, even as emotions remain raw over the 2011 shooting, which killed six and wounded 13, including Giffords. One GOP leader near Tucson choked up last month while wishing the three-term Democrat well before a debate among the four Republican candidates.

Arizona: Congressional district map clears U.S. review | Arizona Republic

The U.S. Department of Justice on Monday approved a new congressional-district map for Arizona, erasing any lingering questions about which geographic areas candidates will run this fall. The OK comes as candidates have already largely embraced the map, which the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission created in January. It reconfigures congressional-district lines to reflect population changes documented by the 2010 census. It also adds a ninth district, the result of population growth over the last decade. The approval means the redistricting commission met its goal to get federal approval the first time it submitted a map. Arizona needs Justice Department pre-clearance for any election-law changes because of past problems with the federal Voting Rights Act, which is designed to protect minority voting rights. "One down, one to go," said Ray Bladine, the commission's executive director.

Arizona: Changes sought in rules for recall vote | Arizona Daily Star

Senate Republicans are moving to keep Democrats from doing to them what they did to Russell Pearce. Legislation set for debate today at the Senate Judiciary Committee would scrap the rules mandating that recall elections be conducted as nonpartisan contests. Instead, anyone who wants to replace a sitting official would first have to survive a partisan primary. The change is crucial.

Arizona: Special election set for June 12 to fill Giffords’ seat | chicagotribune.com

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer on Friday ordered a special general election to be held on June 12 to fill a congressional seat vacated by Tucson Democrat Gabrielle Giffords, who resigned to focus on recovering from a gunshot wound to the head. The Republican governor also set an April 17 primary to choose the candidates who will vie to replace Giffords in what has proved to be a highly competitive district in southern Arizona. Giffords left office on Wednesday, cutting short her third term representing Arizona's 8th congressional district as she continues to recover from a gunshot wound that left her with faltering speech and physical impairments.

Arizona: Gabby Giffords’ Resignation Prompts Race For Congressional Seat | Huffington Post

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' decision to step down from her congressional seat sets up a wide-open race to fill her spot in a conservative-leaning Arizona district that has a history of electing moderates from both parties. The congresswoman's decision announced Sunday also will trigger not one but two entire election cycles before the end of the year, with different district lines in each thanks to congressional redistricting.

Arizona: Huntsman misses Arizona ballot after paperwork error | The Hill

Forms submitted without Jon Huntsman's notarized signature could mean that the former Utah governor will not be able to get on the ballot in neighboring Arizona, spelling more trouble for an already long-shot candidacy. A spokesman for the Arizona secretary of state told The Associated Press that while Huntsman filed his paperwork on time, it was rejected because it was missing a notarized signature from the candidate. Huntsman does not currently appear on the state's list of Republican candidates for the coming primary. The Huntsman campaign says it plans to appeal the decision and believes it will be able to get back onto the ballot.

Arizona: Redistricting Nears Endgame | Roll Call

It is the beginning of the end for the Arizona redistricting drama that has put Congressional races in the state in limbo. The state Independent Redistricting Commission, the bipartisan group tasked with redrawing the state’s Congressional lines, passed a map this evening. It is “pending analyses by the panel’s legal counsel and voting-rights consultants,” according to a news release from the commission. The map will then have to be submitted to the Justice Department for pre-clearance approval.

The vote fell along party lines. Five members constitute the commission: two from each party and a registered Independent named Colleen Mathis. The two Democrats voted for the map, the two Republicans voted against it, and Mathis served as the swing vote for passage.

Arizona: Arizona Elections officials grapple with new Native American language rule | Cronkite News

Coconino County election officials have provided translators at the polls for Navajo speakers. They have done the same for Hopi voters. But Yuma has them stumped. “There has never been a request for (Yuma),” said Coconino County Elections Administrator Patty Hansen. “So now we’re trying to find someone who can speak that language.”

Coconino was one of three Arizona counties that were told by the federal government in October that they would have to add voting assistance in the obscure language, which previously had been required only of Yuma County.

Those four were among 248 counties in 25 states whose populations require election assistance in other languages, according to the Census Bureau. Under the Voting Rights Act, assistance can be required in jurisdictions where a minority with poor English skills makes up 5 percent of the voting-age population and has literacy levels below the national average. But in Arizona, Yuma County officials said they have never received call for assistance in the language, although they claim they are ready if anyone asks.

Arizona: ACLU Moves to Intervene In Voting Rights Act Challenge | American Civil Liberties Union

The American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Arizona filed a motion in a Washington, D.C. federal court today to intervene in the state of Arizona’s challenge to the federal Voting Rights Act (VRA). The ACLU argues that Section 5 of the Act, which since 1965 has protected racial and language minorities’ access to voting, must remain in place.

“Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is critical for ensuring that states do not pass election laws that negatively affect minority voters,” said Katie O'Connor, staff attorney with the ACLU Voting Rights Project. “We are intervening in this case to make sure that this critical piece of legislation is upheld, so that everyone's fundamental right to vote is protected.”

Arizona: Federal Voting Rights Act is Arizona’s redistricting bogeyman | Caveat Lector

We should find out next week if Gov. Jan Brewer will make good on her threats from this week and impeach Colleen Mathis, the chairwoman of the Independent Redistricting Commission, or any other member of the commission. Brewer alleges gross misconduct by the commission, including failing to follow requirements of the independent redistricting commission act, bid rigging and open meetings law violations. Commissioners deny any wrongdoing.

Brewer is picking the wrong fight. The problem is not the commission, it’s Section 5 of the federal Voting Rights Act that requires Arizona to get the blessing of the U.S. Justice Department on any change it makes to voting districts, a process called preclearance. The Act’s intentions nearly 50 years ago was to right 100 years of wrongs in several states that imposed restrictions on voting by racial minorities, mostly southern blacks.

Arizona: Judge Finds Manipulation in Recall Vote in Arizona | NYTimes.com

At first glance, it had the makings of a spirited election: the leader of Arizona’s crackdown on illegal immigration facing off at the polls with an immigrant from Mexico who believed that the state had gone too far. But the immigrant, Olivia Cortes, a retiree who filed papers in July to challenge the State Senate president, Russell Pearce, disappeared from the political scene last week just as quickly as she had appeared. Ms. Cortes’s candidacy for a legislative district in this working-class community east of Phoenix, it now appears, had been a dirty trick.

Critics of Mr. Pearce’s hard-line approach to illegal immigration collected enough signatures to force him into a recall election in November. But allies of Mr. Pearce, who is one of the state’s most powerful politicians, did not take that humiliation lightly. They recruited Ms. Cortes in what was an effort to split the anti-Pearce vote, particularly among Latinos, a judge later found.

Arizona: Olivia Cortes withdraws from Pearce recall race | Arizona Republic

Candidate Olivia Cortes on Thursday withdrew from the Legislative District 18 recall election of Senate President Russell Pearce amid ongoing allegations that her campaign was a sham set up by Pearce supporters to pull votes away from opponent Jerry Lewis.

Pearce will now face only fellow Republican Lewis in the first recall election of a sitting legislator in state history.

document Cortes’ voluntary withdrawal | Recall coverage | Watch Pearce debate live today

Cortes said in a statement that the “constant intimidation and harassment” led to her withdrawal. And her attorney said that the move was the condition of a deal to stop a court hearing scheduled for today.

Arizona: Cortes drops out of recall election | Mohave Daily News

A Mesa woman running in Senate President Russell Pearce’s recall election has dropped out of the race, halting a legal challenge that claims she was a fraudulent candidate meant to siphon votes from the contest’s other contender.

Olivia Cortes filed a voluntary withdrawal with the Arizona secretary of state’s office Thursday. She later issued a statement saying she dropped out of the race because of what she called “constant intimidation and harassment” of herself, her family, friends and neighbors.

“So for me, the dream of having a voice has died,” Cortes’ statement said, adding that she wanted to address economic, education and immigration concerns. Cortes lawyer Anthony Tsontakis said earlier that his client accepted an offer by attorneys for a Pearce critic to cancel a court hearing Friday if she stepped out of the race.

Arizona: Olivia Cortes will remain on ballot in Pearce recall election, court rules | AZ Central

Recall candidate Olivia Cortes will stay on the Nov. 8 ballot despite allegations that her campaign is part of a fraud, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge has ruled.

Judge Edward Burke heard arguments last week in the lawsuit filed by a Legislative District 18 Republican alleging that Cortes is part of a sham campaign to draw votes away from candidate Jerry Lewis and help Pearce retain his seat. In Monday's ruling, Burke wrote that no one during the all-day hearing last week "impugned Cortes' honesty or integrity."

The judge's ruling

"The court finds that she is genuinely opposed to what she believes is Pearce's harsh legislative treatment of and comments about illegal Hispanic immigrants," Burke wrote.

Arizona: Why the lawsuit against Olivia Cortes had to be aggressively defended | Anthony Tsontakis/Arizona Capitol Times

It’s not because the lawsuit was politically motivated. Everyone knows how unapologetically brutal politics can be. And it’s not because the lawsuit was brought to defame Ms. Cortes, either. Placing your name on a ballot is the functional equivalent of sending the world an open invitation to attack your character.

The reason the lawsuit against Olivia Cortes had to be aggressively defended, rather, is that it asked a judge, without statutory authorization, to inquire into the political beliefs, motivations, associations, and activities of ordinary citizens — and then to find legal liability where no law says there is: in the details of those ideologies, agendas, friends, and practices.

Tom Ryan, the plaintiff’s attorney, built the bulk of his case against Cortes around one concept: the political motivations of Ms. Cortes’ nomination petition circulators.

Arizona: Cortes denies being a sham candidate in Pearce recall election | Arizona Republic

Recall candidate Olivia Cortes took the stand Thursday to defend herself against allegations that she is a sham candidate running to draw votes away from candidate Jerry Lewis and help Senate President Russell Pearce retain his seat. “I wanted to offer my points of view as a naturalized citizen, a concerned citizen for the future of Arizona,” Cortes said. “I want to serve my community.” She said the accusations about her campaign make her feel “bad.”

“I feel they are taking away my constitutional right,” she said. “Anybody can run. I’m running to win. I want to win.”

During her testimony, Cortes said she is paying for her campaign but admitted she hasn’t yet spent any money. She said she does not know who paid professional circulators to collect the signatures to get her on the ballot. She said she also does not know who paid for the signs with her name on it that were put up around West Mesa. She doesn’t know who created her Web site. Cortes said she was not forced or paid to run. She said East Valley Tea Party leader Greg Western is the only one helping her with her campaign and as a political novice, she has left many decisions to him.

Arizona: Vote Centers: Is less more? | KYMA News 11

In the up coming Presidential election, voting may be a little different in Yuma County. The number of polling sites needed is much smaller because early voting is the popular way to go. So, Yuma County wants to simplify by consolidating from 42 polling locations to about 10 to 15 locations.

Yuma County Recorder Robyn Stallworth Pouquette, said every election it's the same story, "We receive hundreds and hundreds of calls every election from frustrated voters that have gone to the wrong place."

So Yuma County plans to do something about it. Pouquette said new legislation allows them to have Vote Centers, locations open to all registered voters. Yuma would be the first county in Arizona to adopt the Vote Center.

Arizona: Recall bid vs. Pearce a fraud, 2nd claim says | azcentral.com

Chaos erupted Friday in the recall election of Senate President Russell Pearce. A Legislative District 18 voter filed a lawsuit alleging that Olivia Cortes is a sham candidate running with the intention of pulling votes away from candidate Jerry Lewis to help Pearce. The Secretary of State's Office declined to investigate the same complaint another district voter filed.

Cortes, who has for weeks evaded questions about her candidacy and political positions, on Friday sent out an e-mail announcing a campaign website and seeking voter support. Chandler attorney Tom Ryan filed the lawsuit on behalf of Mary Lou Boettcher. Ryan also represented Citizens for a Better Arizona, the group that collected signatures to get the recall on the ballot. Boettcher, a Republican, was involved in that group.

The lawsuit alleges that Cortes is a "well-known supporter" of Pearce and "has no campaign committee, no volunteers for her campaign and her campaign is being financed and operated entirely by those who wish to dilute the vote in favor of recalled Senator Russell Pearce." It states that Cortes is a fraudulent and diversionary candidate, in violation of state law.

Arizona: New lawsuit over Russell Pearce recall election | azfamily.com

There are new developments regarding the Russell Pearce recall election and candidate Olivia Cortes. Many say she is a sham designed to siphon votes from Pearce's other challenger, Jerry Lewis.

After the secretary of state's office said it will not investigate allegations of fraud, a Mesa woman filed a lawsuit. Cortes is starting to look more like a legitimate candidate to challenge Senate President Russell Pearce. Her website went live Friday and she issued a press release that says, "I want to have an opportunity, to bring into this race my points of view and observations as a Permanent Alien and later Naturalized American Citizen for over forty years.”

Cortes was home Tuesday and didn't answer when I dropped by. She didn't respond Friday when 3TV's Frank Camacho left her a note or when I called later.

Arizona: State will not investigate recall candidate Cortes | AZ Central

Chaos erupted Friday in the recall election of Senate President Russell Pearce. A Legislative District 18 voter filed a lawsuit alleging that Olivia Cortes is a fraud candidate running with the intention of pulling votes away from candidate Jerry Lewis to help Pearce. The Secretary of State's Office declined to investigate the same complaint another district voter filed with that office.

Cortes, who has for weeks evaded questions about her candidacy and political positions, on Friday sent out an e-mail announcing a campaign Web site and seeking voter support.

Chandler attorney Tom Ryan filed the lawsuit on behalf of Mary Lou Boettcher. Ryan also represented Citizens for a Better Arizona, the group that collected signatures to get the recall on the ballot. Boettcher, a Republican, was involved in that group.

Alabama: Failure of Alabama challenge to Voting Rights Act looms over Arizona suit | East Valley Tribune

The decision by a federal judge Wednesday to reject challenges by an Alabama county to the Voting Rights Act likely will mean a similar fate for Arizona’s lawsuit, state Attorney General Tom Horne said. Horne acknowledged that the lawsuit he filed last month is based on many of the same arguments that Shelby County made. More to the point, the judge who issued Wednesday’s ruling upholding the federal law is the same one assigned to hear Arizona’s challenge.

But there are other signs that Horne will have a hard time arguing that there’s no reason the Voting Rights Act should extend to Arizona. Horne contends that any discrimination against minorities that may have occurred in the past in Arizona is ancient history. He said there is no evidence of ongoing problems.

But in his 151-page ruling in the Alabama case, Judge John Bates said there are studies as recent as 2004 showing a significant disparity between voter turnout of Hispanics and Anglos. And he cited evidence presented to Congress in 2006 when it renewed the Voting Rights Act, of “men (in Arizona) wearing military or tool belts and black T-shirts reading ‘U.S. Constitutional Enforcement’ approaching Latinos waiting in line to vote, demanding proof of citizenship.”

Arizona: Author of illegal immigration law to face recall election | latimes.com

An Arizona lawmaker best known as the author of a controversial law that cracks down on illegal immigrants will face a recall election Nov. 8.  In a ruling Tuesday, the Arizona Supreme Court gave the go-ahead for the recall election of Russell Pearce, the president of the state Senate and arguably the most powerful politician in the Arizona.

Supporters describe Pearce, a former sheriff's deputy, as a principled lawmaker trying to protect his state; critics say he panders to racism and demonizes immigrants, legal and illegal.

The justices held a closed-door conference on an appeal from a Pearce supporter who alleged that because of flawed paperwork, the recall drive did not amass enough valid voter signatures to force the recall election in the lawmaker’s district in the Phoenix suburb of Mesa.

Arizona: State Supreme Court to consider appeal on challenge to recall election for legislative leader | The Republic

The Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday is scheduled to consider whether to allow a Nov. 8 recall election to be held for state Senate President Russell Pearce, a Republican known nationally for championing legislation against illegal immigration.

A Pearce supporter appealed a trial judge's Aug. 12 ruling that denied the supporter's request to call off the election in Pearce's legislative district in Mesa, a Phoenix suburb.

Arizona: State’s Case Against the Voting Rights Act | The Atlantic

In the past few years, the right to vote--basic to any real democratic self-government--has become controversial again.  Since the Republican sweep of state legislatures in 2010, seven states have enacted fashionable new "voter ID" laws.  No one even pretends these laws won't make it harder for older, poorer, less white (and, coincidentally, more Democratic) voters to cast a ballot.  (The Supreme Court regrettably gave the go-ahead to these laws in the 2007 case of Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections.)

It is almost surreal that in this moment that Arizona, which is becoming to Latinos what Mississippi once was to African Americans, is now seeking a judicial decree that voting rights are no longer a matter for Congressional concern.

Arizona's new Republican Attorney General, Tom Horne, filed a suit last month asking a federal court to declare that § 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is unconstitutional.  Arizona--in some ways the Mississippi of the 21st Century--is a weird plaintiff, and its claims are even weirder; but weirder claims have succeeded in the past. The Supreme Court signaled in 2009 that it was a bit weary of all this right-to-vote business.  If "state's-rights" advocates succeed in weakening the Act, and gutting Congress's enforcement power under the Fifteenth Amendment, it will be a matter of serious concern.