What to Make of the Confusing and (Mostly) Incorrect Federal Court Ruling on Arizona’s Proof of Citizenship Election Law

What to Make of the Confusing and (Mostly) Incorrect Federal Court Ruling on Arizona’s Proof of Citizenship Election Law

It is no secret that an overwhelming number of Americans believe that only U.S. citizens should be allowed to vote in our elections. It arguably is and ought to be the first and primary qualification to vote. But what good is that requirement if it isn’t verified? In other words, without proof of citizenship, we are relying on a simple stroke of a pen or pencil on a registration form, checking a small box attesting to citizenship.

That’s why in 2004 Arizona voters approved a measure to require proof of citizenship before registering to vote. But, in the 20 years since, that requirement has been whittled away and now there are tens of thousands of people voting in Arizona elections (often referred to as “Federal only” voters) without ever having provided evidence of their citizenship.

In response to this explosion of ‘Federal Only’ voters, the Arizona legislature passed two landmark bills, HB2492 and HB2243, to require proof of citizenship and regular, enhanced voter roll maintenance to ensure only eligible individuals are registering and voting in our elections.

What happened next shouldn’t surprise anyone that has watched the left fight every reasonable voter integrity measure around the country. As soon as both bills were signed into law, a dozen liberal organizations and the Biden Justice Department sued in federal court, claiming that the measures were unconstitutional, illegal, and (of course) racist.

The case was given to Bill Clinton appointed judge Susan Bolton, and after a year of litigation, she issued a confusing, disjointed two-part ruling that is destined for appeal. And while a few positives can be gleaned from the decision, the bad and ugly from the liberal opinion far outweighed the good.

The Bad

Bolton had already ruled against many of the provisions last September, including, most importantly, blocking Arizona from rejecting state voter registration forms not accompanied with proof of citizenship (even though the U.S. Supreme Court clearly stated that we could) and from preventing “Federal Only Voters” from voting in presidential elections and by mail.

In this new ruling, Bolton also ruled that the requirement that a registrant include their place of birth on their voter registration form (currently optional), which would have helped verify the citizenship status of voters, violates the materiality provision of the Civil Rights Act. In other words, although the U.S. Supreme Court just a decade ago said we are free to design our own form and request the information we determine is necessary, Bolton decided for us, preventing us from collecting critical information from registrants to verify citizenship status.

Residency might be second only to citizenship as a qualification to vote: you have to be a citizen, and you must live here to vote in our elections. Pretty basic. But Bolton also decided that requiring registrants using the state form to prove their residency violates the National Voter Registration Act, requiring them to be registered as Federal Only Voters.

The Ugly

After the liberal group plaintiffs tried to go on a fishing expedition last year, serving the Club with subpoenas to access years of our communications, Bolton spent six pages determining whether the laws were passed with discriminatory intent. Three of those pages were spent on the Club’s involvement in getting these bills passed, where she described us as a “conservative lobbying group” (without identifying the nonprofit plaintiffs likewise as “liberal lobbying groups”). Even worse, she wrote that our previous articles amounted to racial animosity. Her evidence? In some of them we argued the bills would help stop “illegals” from voting. And, according to Bolton, the word “illegals” is a “code word” that “may demonstrate discriminatory intent.”

Her evidence for that? The testimony of one individual, former state senator Martín Quezada, whose nomination by Hobbs to head the Registrar of Contractors was rejected by the Arizona Senate last year. That was enough for a federal judge, in a federal court order, to allege our advocacy for the security of elections was fueled, at least in part, with coded racist language.

This claim is even more absurd now given that just last week President Biden (whose DOJ is a lead plaintiff against these bills) used the “coded word” “illegals” during his State of the Union address to Congress. Would Judge Bolton say that President Biden was using “coded” racist language too?

The Good

Even though Bolton thinks our advocacy was rooted in racism, it wasn’t enough to find that the legislature acted with discriminatory intent, because we didn’t, and they didn’t. And that alone is a huge win as this case moves to an appeal, because it was the bulk of the argument from the “liberal lobbying” group plaintiffs.

Additionally, many of the voter list maintenance provisions were upheld, meaning Arizona counties will be checking the voter rolls against several databases regularly and removing those not eligible to vote in our elections. Individuals who obtain a driver’s license in another state, those who attest on a jury questionnaire that they are not a U.S. citizen or are not a resident, SAVE (the federal immigration database), and more, will begin to clean up our voter list.

Finally, before the case moved to trial, the RNC intervened, as did Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma on behalf of the legislature, allowing for an appeal all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary to uphold these commonsense laws before the 2024 election. And we will stand with them as it does.

Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network

Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!

Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.

Arizona Free Enterprise Club Responds to Judge Bolton’s Ruling on HB 2492 and HB 2243

Arizona Free Enterprise Club Responds to Judge Bolton’s Ruling on HB 2492 and HB 2243

PHOENIX, ARIZONA – Last week, federal Judge Susan R. Bolton ruled on a challenge to HB 2492 and HB 2243, which were passed by the Arizona Legislature and signed into law by then-Governor Doug Ducey in 2022. In her opinion, Judge Bolton highlighted the work of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club in helping to draft and lobby for these critical protections that ensure only eligible voters are registered and voting in our elections.

According to Judge Bolton, the State of Arizona “may not reject State form registrations that lack an individual’s state or country of birth, may not conduct SAVE checks on any registered voter whom county recorders have reason to believe are a non-citizen, [and] may not reject State form registrations that are not accompanied by documentary proof of residence.”

“Though Arizonans can take solace in the fact that an activist judge didn’t completely dismantle these reasonable and commonsense laws, we are extremely disappointed in her decision to strike down several lawful provisions that we expect will be upheld on appeal,” said Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club. “Officials across all branches and jurisdictions of our government should be working to uphold the integrity of our laws and to ensure that the votes of American citizens are not canceled or compromised by even a single illegal vote.”

In her ruling, Judge Bolton wrote that her Court weighed the Free Enterprise Club’s role in authoring the law and our “coded appeals as some evidence of community animus.” Those “coded appeals,” per Judge Bolton, were the “disseminat[ion] [of] lobbying materials by email to Arizona legislators that described how the Voting Laws would prevent ‘illegals’ from voting in Arizona elections.” The opinion explained that “the use of ‘code words’ may demonstrate discriminatory intent, and the term ‘illegals’ can evince racial animus for members of the Latino community in Arizona.”

Mussi added, “It is outrageous that Judge Bolton would use an official court opinion to falsely accuse concerned and law-abiding American citizens of having racist intent in our efforts to pass legislation to strengthen election integrity in this state. This accusation is especially laughable when we consider the state of the open border, where millions of men, women, and children from more than 160 countries of origin have illegally crossed into America – many of whom are taking up residence and receiving benefits on the backs of hardworking taxpayers. It shouldn’t take a grassroots advocacy organization to point out the constitutional responsibility of a federal court, yet sadly, this is the present state of our nation.”

We expect the Legislature and other Defendants to quickly appeal this ruling, and we look forward to filing briefs in support.

Katie Hobbs Has Turned the Governor’s Office Into a Jobs Program for Her Political Friends

Katie Hobbs Has Turned the Governor’s Office Into a Jobs Program for Her Political Friends

For the past three years, the people of Arizona have been forced to deal with the fallout of a struggling economy, rising prices, and an inflation rate that, at one point, was the highest in the country. With this in mind, Republicans got to work, delivering the largest tax cut in state history and following that up with a budget that included tax rebates for Arizona families.

But Governor Katie Hobbs clearly has much different priorities when it comes to your hard-earned money. True to her 10-year history of pulverizing Arizona taxpayers, Hobbs announced during her State of the State address in January her desire to—you guessed it—massively grow the size of state government. And judging by the executive staff hiring spree that Hobbs is on as governor, it’s clear that this isn’t just empty rhetoric.

Last month it was discovered that in just over a year Katie Hobbs has expanded her office staff by approximately 40 employees, a whopping 40% increase over the previous administration. Among these new hires are:

    • Six people working in the newly created Office of Resiliency.
    • Four new employees in the Office of Tribal Relations.
    • Three new in-house attorneys, bringing the total number to four

That’s right. The Arizona Governor’s Office now has six people working on “resiliency,” a department Hobbs created to further push the Green New Deal agenda on our state. What a joke.

So, how much is all this costing Arizona taxpayers? According to the report, in addition to 40 new staffers, the average salary under Hobbs is $10,000 more than it was under former Republican Governor Doug Ducey. All added together, the Katie Hobbs jobs program for her political cronies, paid for by Arizona taxpayers, has increased executive employment costs by over 50%!

In the meantime, Arizona is running a budget deficit while Hobbs tries to scapegoat school choice and our state’s historic tax cuts. But neither of these are the problem. The problem is spending. It’s always been spending.

Just five years ago, the legislature enacted a budget that included $10.1 billion in ongoing spending, plus $500 million in “one-time” expenditures ($10.7 billion total). By FY 2023, that number had exploded to nearly $15 billion in ongoing spending. And while the most recent budget negotiated with Hobbs kept ongoing spending at a lower trajectory, it included “one-time” outlays that brought the total budget cost to $17.8 billion!

But instead of reining in this spending, especially in the midst of our challenging economic times, Hobbs would rather blame tax cuts—ignoring the fact that despite these cuts, tax revenue has continued to climb largely due to the decision in 2019 to start taxing online sales.

Then, there’s Hobbs’ favorite target—the wildly popular Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program. Hobbs and her buddies in the teachers’ unions will tell you that ESAs are costing the state hundreds of millions of dollars and diverting funds from district schools. But the reality is the opposite. ESAs represent only a tiny fraction of all K-12 school spending, and taxpayers actually save money when a parent decides to leave a district school for a charter or private school. On top of that, what Hobbs and the teachers’ unions won’t tell you is that Arizona taxpayers are giving district schools more money than ever before. In fact, public school funding has soared to $15K per student, up from $10K just five years ago. Now, according to the Chief Financial Officer for the Arizona Department of Education, our state’s public schools have over $1 billion in surplus.

If Hobbs really cares about making sure Arizona is “resilient,” she would start by making sure that the people of our state keep more money in their wallets. But she’ll never do that. Hobbs would rather flex her power as governor to create a multi-million-dollar program so her political friends can do phony baloney jobs and reverse the policies that have positioned our state as the envy of much of the nation. Now, it’s up to lawmakers to make sure the next state budget keeps her in check.

Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network

Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!

Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.

The Resignation of Gilbert’s Digital Government Chief Is a Big Victory for Independent Media

The Resignation of Gilbert’s Digital Government Chief Is a Big Victory for Independent Media

Government leaders must be held accountable. That’s supposed to be the job of the mainstream media. But somewhere along the line, this changed. Many journalists employed by traditional corporate media started to twist facts to drive home a particular narrative. Others began disguising their own opinions as news. And some just stopped doing any real investigations altogether—choosing to protect our elected officials and government bureaucrats from any sort of real accountability.

Now, with fewer people trusting in the mainstream media, our nation has seen a rise in independent news media. We have a great one right here in Arizona called AZ Free News that has shown it is willing to do real research and investigation into what is happening in our state. And their latest investigative report shows exactly why independent journalism is critical for the future of our state and nation.

AZ Free News Exposes Gilbert’s Orwellian Office of Digital Government

In January, AZ Free News released an investigative report on the Town of Gilbert’s Office of Digital Government (ODG). For over a decade, the ODG, which is made up of approximately a dozen employees, has been working to ensure that Gilbert’s 30 official digital accounts—along with the personal online posts of all Town of Gilbert employees—align with a progressive, liberal agenda.

This concerted effort to control conservative speech costs Gilbert taxpayers $1.1 million each year in salary alone with Chief Digital Officer Dana Berchman making over $200,000 annually.

When asked about the allegations in the investigative report, the town doubled down on its censorship efforts, stating that it “will not tolerate divisive, offensive or culturally insensitive posts from employees purporting to represent the Town.” But as we so often see with leftist government bureaucrats: “Rules for thee, but not for me.” After all, Berchman, who interned for Hillary Clinton’s 2000 Senate Campaign, regularly used her personal social media profiles to promote then-presidential candidate Joe Biden while urging people to vote out then-President Donald Trump.

How is that not divisive? Shouldn’t Dana Berchman be held accountable for her online speech just like the rest of the Town of Gilbert’s employees?

As a devout leftist, Berchman probably figured she could get away with it, but after the AZ Free News report exposed her hypocrisy, she decided to hide, making her Twitter profile private to avoid any further backlash. (Katie Hobbs would be proud.)

But the damage was already done.

Gilbert’s Chief Digital Officer Resigns

In response to the AZ Free News report, Gilbert residents flooded the next town council meeting to demand justice for the ODG’s First Amendment violations. And later in the meeting, Councilman Jim Torgeson proposed that the council review the mission, purpose, and future existence of ODG. That review is set to take place on March 5. But it will no longer affect Dana Berchman.

Why?

Because earlier this week, Berchman emailed her resignation to the town council, effective March 7. And while the now-former head of Gilbert’s ODG didn’t specifically cite the pending town council review, it is interesting timing, isn’t it?

This is certainly great news for Gilbert residents, but it also shows the importance of real independent journalism. Had it not been for the investigation and reporting of AZ Free News, the town’s citizens would’ve been kept in the dark about this blatant government overreach. But armed with this information, the people were able to push back and hold their government accountable.

Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network

Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!

Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.

We’re Suing Adrian Fontes for His Illegal Elections Procedures Manual

We’re Suing Adrian Fontes for His Illegal Elections Procedures Manual

If Adrian Fontes likes spending time in court, he’s going to have a fun time in 2024. In case you’ve lost count, Arizona’s Secretary of State has been sued three times over his Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) in just the last two weeks. That’s what happens when you produce one of the most radical EPMs in Arizona’s history.

At the end of January, Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma filed a lawsuit against Fontes over a variety of provisions in his EPM that violate or conflict with current election laws in our state. But the party was just getting started.

Last week, the Arizona Republican Party, the Republican National Committee, and the Yavapai County GOP also sued Fontes for his blatant attempt to rewrite election law through his EPM. And on the same day, we filed our own lawsuit against Fontes over the promulgation of certain unlawful rules set forth in his EPM.

The reality is that, in his role as Secretary of State, Adrian Fontes is supposed to provide an EPM that gives impartial direction to county recorders to ensure uniform and correct implementation of election law. Instead, he prescribed certain rules without the power to do so and moved forward with an EPM that contains several “rules” that are unconstitutional.

The EPM Places Protected Political Speech at Risk of Criminal Prosecution

Several rules in Fontes’ EPM criminalize activity that is protected under the First Amendment—creating an unconstitutional chilling effect on protected political speech. One portion of the EPM states that the “County Recorder or officer in charge of elections may restrict activities that interfere with the ability of voters and/or staff to access the ballot drop-off locations free from obstruction or harassment.”

To the average person, that probably seems reasonable, until you realize that according to the EPM, voter intimidation or harassment includes:

    • Staying within 75 feet of a ballot drop box to simply monitor individuals who are delivering ballots.
    • Following individuals delivering ballots to the drop box.
    • Speaking to an individual who is returning ballots to a drop box and is within 75 feet of that drop box.

Monitoring drop boxes? Speaking to people? How can any of this be considered voter intimidation or harassment? But the EPM isn’t done yet. It also bans photographing or videotaping at election sites! But these activities—watching drop boxes, speaking to people at election sites, and photographing activity at election sites—all constitute forms of speech and are protected under the First Amendment.

The EPM Requires Arizona Political Parties to Open Their Primaries to Federal Only Voters

If deliberate violations of the First Amendment aren’t bad enough, Fontes’ EPM contradicts statutory requirements and exceeds statutory authority by opening the Presidential Preference Election to federal only voters. Arizona law is clear that any person who has registered to vote but has not provided acceptable evidence of citizenship is not eligible to vote in presidential elections. That certainly includes the Presidential Preference Election. But as you might expect, Fontes fails to cite anything that gives him the authority to establish such a provision. Instead, he is bypassing Arizona’s stricter voter registration requirements to essentially create a new law out of whole cloth.

If the illegal provisions in this manual are allowed to stand, the integrity and transparency of Arizona’s elections would continue to dissipate at the hands of leftwing ideologues. That’s exactly why the Free Enterprise Club, in collaboration with our friends at the America First Policy Institute and Grand Canyon Legal Center, filed this critical lawsuit. The people of Arizona deserve free, fair, transparent, and lawful elections. Now, it’s up to the courts to see through Fontes’ agenda and force him to adhere to state law.

Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network

Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!

Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.

Arizonans Must Protect Their Gas Devices From Extreme Government Mandates

Arizonans Must Protect Their Gas Devices From Extreme Government Mandates

“Do as we say, and not as we do.” That is typically how it goes with government. In this case, the “do as we say” means you giving up your gas stoves and cars. The “not as we do,” well, the Vice President of the United States still openly enjoys her very own gas stove, and don’t expect the President to give up Air Force One or his large fleet of gas limousines and cars anytime soon. Also, you probably shouldn’t sit in anticipation for the activists to give up the private jets they fly into climate conferences to scheme about how to limit your access to gas devices, or their yachts. Remember, it’s do as we say, not as we do.

Normally, the left will try to hide and subvert their goals. That’s what they did with their efforts to ban gas stoves: have the media tell everyone it was a conspiracy theory, and that no one wanted to take them, meanwhile having several agencies draft complicated rules to basically regulate them out of existence. Now, however, they have become more emboldened to just come right out and say it: we are coming for your gas cars.

Seriously, at least 25 countries have already announced or enacted bans on gas cars. Here in the U.S., California took the lead to ban the sale of gas cars by 2035 through regulatory fiat (no vote of the legislature, no signature of the governor, just one regulatory board passing one regulation), and at least a dozen have since followed suit.

Don’t think Arizona is in the clear either. After Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found Maricopa County to be in “noncompliance” with the Clean Air Act’s ozone standards, the bureaucracy tasked with developing solutions to lower emissions basically produced a carbon copy of the California plan to ban gas cars, gas stoves, gas leaf blowers, and other lawn equipment, among hundreds of other draconian ideas.

If they don’t submit a new plan to the EPA soon, the federal government might come in to foist a federal plan on us anyway. Plus, right now they are considering new tailpipe emission standards that would effectively result in a ban on gas cars, which has been opposed by nearly 5,000 car dealerships across the country as well as several national and local organizations.

That’s why HCR2050, introduced by Representative Gail Griffin and co-sponsored by 30 of her colleagues in the House, is one of the most important measures this session. If passed by the legislature and approved by the voters in November, it would amend the constitution to prohibit the government from restricting the use, sale, or manufacturing of devices based on the energy source. In other words, no gas stove bans, and no gas car bans.

It should go without saying, but banning gas devices would be catastrophic. Every step of the way, gas devices are used to manufacture and to transport goods. An outright ban would inflate all of these costs and deprive Arizonans of their right to own and use them.

Additionally, the US grid isn’t even close to being able to support the forced total electrification being pushed by the left. Rates would skyrocket, and at the same time, reliability would plummet. Need to travel in the snow? If your power was miraculously still on when you left, good luck relying on your electric vehicle to provide heat and still have the range to make it to your destination. And kiss goodbye air conditioning on a 115-degree August day in Arizona.

The truth is that these ideas are dangerous and would create a real public health crisis in Arizona, not the made up one to fearmonger against the use of energy sources, including fossil fuels, that have led to immense human flourishing and saved countless lives.

That’s why other state legislatures have started pushing back. Last year, the Wisconsin legislature passed, with a strong coalition in support, AB 141, by a 2-1 vote, to prevent discrimination based on energy source. Unfortunately, it was vetoed by their governor, who said it would diminish their “ability to help combat climate change.”

Now, Arizona has a unique opportunity to lead on the issue. Lawmakers can and should swiftly pass HCR2050 this session so that voters can protect their devices from misguided, unpopular, and dangerous energy discrimination, and be free from infringement from federal, state, or local governments to use the stoves, cars, and equipment of their choice.

Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network

Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!

Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.