Republican leaders in Arizona are aligning with the state’s Democratic Secretary of State in a notable legal battle concerning the eligibility of approximately 97,000 voters to receive full ballots in the upcoming election. They argue that, despite some citizens possibly failing to submit proof of citizenship, these voters should retain their rights to participate in local and state elections.

Gina Swoboda, chair of the Arizona Republican Party, emphasized the injustice faced by these voters, stating, “Nearly 100,000 Arizona voters should not be penalized for a mistake made by the government.” Her remarks came in light of the party’s appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, urging it not to disenfranchise voters due to registration issues stemming from bureaucratic complications.

In 2004, Arizona voters approved a law mandating evidence of citizenship for voters in local and state elections. However, this requirement was blocked by the U.S. Supreme Court for federal elections, resulting in a system where individuals lacking adequate documentation could only receive federal ballots. This legal landscape has placed almost 100,000 voters at risk of receiving incomplete ballots due to a two-decade-old coding error impacting the coordination between Arizona’s Motor Vehicle Division and its voter registration database.

This glitch primarily affects individuals who acquired driver’s licenses before October 1996 and later registered to vote using a duplicate license post-2004. Such individuals were incorrectly classified as having submitted proper citizenship evidence. Meanwhile, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, a Republican, has filed an emergency request with the state Supreme Court, seeking to restrict the ballot eligibility of these voters unless they can provide proper documentation.

Despite being a small fraction of Arizona’s 4.1 million voters, the loss of ballots for this group could significantly impact the election outcome in a state known for its close races. The Republican Party is particularly concerned as many affected individuals are older voters who likely lean conservative.

On the issue, Secretary of State Adrian Fontes advocated for maintaining the current voting pattern while resolving eligibility documentation after the election. As deadlines loom—military and overseas ballots are due to be mailed soon, while voter registration closes on October 7—introducing new regulations could create unnecessary confusion, argued Fontes and his attorney.

Further supporting this stance, Fontes highlighted that the majority of the 97,000 voters likely possess legal residency statuses. Research has consistently indicated that instances of non-citizen voting are rare. Furthermore, those who registered without documented proof had still affirmatively stated their citizenship under penalty of perjury.

Attorney Craig Morgan, representing Fontes, described attempts to disenfranchise voters without legitimate cause as “undemocratic” and “unconstitutional.” He urged the court to refrain from making legislative changes in the middle of an election cycle, suggesting this could infringe on foundational voting rights.

The debate has garnered backing from Republican legislative leaders, including Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma, who affirmed Fontes’ position in a recent motion. They noted their interest was rooted in protecting due process and ensuring fairness in the application of Arizona’s voter ID laws.

Until the Supreme Court reaches a decision, the voting rights of the affected 97,000 individuals remain precariously unresolved. In anticipation of a ruling, Fontes has instructed county recorders to refrain from altering any voter statuses and to prepare for potential adjustments based on the court’s decision. Additionally, U.S. Rep. Greg Stanton, a Democrat from Phoenix, has reached out to the Department of Homeland Security for assistance in verifying the citizenship statuses of these individuals.