Fontes Seeks to Shield Voter List from Public Scrutiny Ahead of Election

The legal dispute surrounding the release of names of potentially unverified voters in Arizona has escalated, with Secretary of State Adrian Fontes’ attorney arguing that public disclosure could result in voter intimidation. During a hearing on Tuesday, Craig Morgan emphasized that while the names are indeed public records, there are significant reasons to withhold them until after the election.

Morgan warned that revealing the identities of approximately 218,000 voters could empower groups like Strong Communities Arizona to misuse the information, leading to harassment. He asserted, “I’ll have video evidence to show you of at least one instance where people show up at these folk’s doors pretending to be from my client’s office,” suggesting that such actions undermine voter rights.

Conversely, James Rogers, representing Strong Communities and affiliated with the America First Legal Foundation, dismissed Morgan’s claims as unfounded. He highlighted a lack of complaints against their outreach efforts, claiming they have successfully contacted over a million voters this year without incident.

Rogers argued for the urgency of public disclosure, asserting that public confidence in electoral integrity is crucial. “One major problem in every election diminishes voter trust,” he stated, suggesting that transparency could mitigate these concerns.

The Ohio Supreme Court last month affirmed that voters affected by the current situation are still eligible to vote in all races this election cycle. This ruling stemmed from a 2004 law mandating proof of citizenship to register, a law that has inadvertently led to confusion regarding those who registered after obtaining driver’s licenses post-1996.

Morgan insisted that there’s no pressing need to rush the list’s release, pointing out that election integrity is being upheld. He mentioned that the Secretary of State’s office does not yet possess a vetted list of affected individuals, calling it a “glitch” in data from the Motor Vehicle Division (MVD).

Judge Scott Blaney, overseeing the case, expressed skepticism about the absence of a complete list. He questioned why details of the current list could not be disclosed as verification continued, noting that Fontes had previously issued a press release citing the number of affected individuals.

The debate includes potential judicial review by the Arizona Supreme Court, predicated on who prevails in the current dispute, which may delay resolution amid the ongoing electoral process. There remains uncertainty whether the court will hear the case before the impending election, particularly as early voting begins in Arizona.

Current data indicates that the list of potentially affected voters comprises roughly 38% Republicans, 27% Democrats, with the remainder belonging to minor parties or remaining unaffiliated, highlighting that the issue predominantly impacts older voters with legacy licenses.