Judge Dismisses GOP Challenge to Erase 1.27 Million Arizona Voters

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Arizona Republicans, which claimed that the state is in violation of federal law regarding its voter registration list. U.S. District Court Judge Dominic Lanza ruled that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to bring the suit. The lawsuit was initiated earlier this year by Arizona Republican Party Chairwoman Gina Swoboda, along with Scot Mussi of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club and Steven Gaynor, a Republican businessman who ran for state elections chief in 2018.

The plaintiffs accused Secretary of State Adrian Fontes of failing to remove over a million ineligible voters from the rolls, thereby diluting the influence of legitimate voters. They allege this inaction infringes upon the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which mandates states to maintain their voter rolls effectively.

In his ruling, Judge Lanza objected to the Republicans’ claims, emphasizing that they did not demonstrate a specific and concrete injury necessary for establishing standing. Citing a U.S. Supreme Court decision, he stated that mere disagreement with government actions does not qualify as a legal injury. “A citizen does not have standing to challenge a government regulation simply because the plaintiff believes that the government is acting illegally,” Lanza wrote.

The judge scrutinized the Republican’s arguments throughout his 19-page ruling. Lanza noted that their assertion of vote dilution is too speculative and depends on multiple contingencies. For instance, they failed to present any evidence that the alleged ineligible voters voted or that their actions significantly impacted legitimate voters.

According to the lawsuit, between 500,000 and 1.27 million voters remain registered despite being deceased or having moved away, a figure derived from a non-response to voter confirmation notices sent to Maricopa County residents. After the initial outreach, more than 130,000 were removed from the rolls, but many others remained unverified, prompting the lawsuit.

Additionally, the Republicans highlighted purportedly exaggerated voter registration rates in counties such as Apache and Navajo. However, Judge Lanza maintained that their claims of vote dilution lacked evidence and remained too hypothetical.

Judge Lanza also dismissed the notion that a perceived lack of voter system confidence would deter future voting, clarifying that self-inflicted harm based on hypothetical fears does not constitute grounds for legal action. “Respondents cannot manufacture standing merely by inflicting harm on themselves based on their fears of hypothetical future harm,” he reiterated.

The lawsuit’s assertion that the Republican Party incurred costs due to Fontes’ inefficiency was similarly rejected. Lanza indicated that organizations must demonstrate a direct impact from a government action to have legal standing, emphasizing that mere advocacy against a government action does not equate to a personal injury.