Arizona’s Authority to Certify Election Results Stands Strong Despite Federal Court Ruling

A federal judge has ruled against an Arizona rule designed to expedite the certification of election results. U.S. District Court Judge Michael Liburdi’s decision emphasizes that simply excluding results from a county whose officials refuse to certify is not permissible, given the range of legal options available for addressing such scenarios.

The rule, recently added to the Election Procedures Manual by Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, would have afforded the secretary the authority to proceed with statewide certification without needing results from a non-compliant county. The recent legal challenge spearheaded by conservative groups prompted a judicial review, and Judge Liburdi pointed out that Fontes’ office did not sufficiently justify the necessity of this rule over existing alternatives aimed at ensuring that all voters have their voices heard.

Liburdi outlined several alternatives that could maintain the integrity of the election process, including legal action against county supervisors who fail to certify results. Instances from the 2022 elections highlighted the real implications of such a refusal. For instance, two Republican supervisors in Cochise County faced legal repercussions after attempting to bypass their certification responsibilities.

Fontes, a Democrat, stated that his office is currently reviewing the ruling and will consider an appeal. The situation isn’t merely theoretical; recent years have seen debates over election integrity in conservative counties like Mohave, where some supervisors have hinted at rejecting certification under pressure from constituents.

The rule in question aimed to serve as a contingency in rare situations, allowing for statewide certification without a county’s input if all other avenues were exhausted. Fontes had indicated the intention to rely on other “tools at his disposal” before resorting to the new rule.

The state’s Election Procedures Manual serves as critical guidance for county officials, detailing compliance with state election laws. The recent revisions by Fontes considered lessons learned from the last midterm elections, particularly around contentious issues like ballot-hand counting. This manual was endorsed by both Governor Katie Hobbs and Attorney General Kris Mayes.

Other conservative groups have also pursued legal action against different provisions in the Election Procedures Manual, with some results pending in state court. In a coordinated effort, the America First Policy Institute filed a federal lawsuit this past July, which led to Liburdi’s recent ruling. This subsequent legal action challenged additional restrictions linked to activities perceived as voter intimidation.

While Fontes’ office sought to have the case dismissed, Judge Liburdi characterized the exclusion rule as a potentially dangerous mechanism capable of disenfranchising voters at the sole discretion of the secretary. He articulated concerns about prioritizing the finality of results over their accuracy and the broader implications for democracy.

Liburdi also noted alternatives proposed by America First that could facilitate the certification process under such circumstances, including appointing a special master or auditor to confirm results. He concluded that these options would ensure all voters are included while meeting statutory deadlines for election results.

This article encapsulates the unfolding legal landscape surrounding Arizona’s election procedures and reaffirms the pivotal balance between ensuring timely results and upholding democratic principles.