Arizona Court Strikes Down Secretary of State Fontes’ Election Guidelines

By Staff Reporter |

The Arizona Court of Appeals has delivered a significant ruling regarding the Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) developed by Secretary of State Adrian Fontes. In a decisive move, Judge Lacey Gard overturned a previous lower court’s dismissal of the case, Republican National Committee, et al. vs. Adrian Fontes, et al., reinstating the challenges against the EPM that were initially filed last summer.

Judge Gard determined that the EPM is indeed subject to the Arizona Administrative Procedure Act (APA), contradicting the lower court’s findings. The judge emphasized that the APA mandates compliance for all agencies unless explicitly exempted, asserting that, “The APA and EPM statutes impose duties on the Secretary that may require him to begin promulgating the EPM earlier.” Nevertheless, no direct conflict between the two statutes was identified.

Further highlighting procedural missteps, Gard ruled that Fontes violated the APA by restricting public comment on the proposed EPM to 15 days instead of the obligatory 30 days. This ruling underscores the judiciary’s commitment to transparency and public participation in governmental processes.

While Gard’s ruling did not address other claims presented by the Republican National Committee regarding specific provisions of the EPM, she concluded that Fontes’ handling of the 2023 EPM did not meet the APA’s rigorous standards for rulemaking.

The Republican Party of Arizona (AZGOP), along with state legislative leaders and advocacy groups, has actively contested the EPM since February. In light of the recent ruling, AZGOP Chair Gina Swoboda stated that the appeals court has confirmed the EPM’s unconstitutionality and criticized Fontes for “overreaching” in his authority.

Swoboda characterized the EPM as a partisan maneuver aimed at undermining the integrity of Arizona elections. She asserted that the manual included provisions conflicting with existing state election laws, creating advantages for one political faction.

The GOP’s grievances with Fontes’ EPM extend beyond procedural violations. Their concerns include provisions that would accept individuals as voters who self-identify as noncitizens, fail to provide necessary verification of their citizenship, or allow mail-in voters to bypass documentation requirements. Other issues included limiting the scrutiny of voter signatures on mail ballots and facilitating provisional ballots for out-of-precinct voters.