A panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down two Arizona election integrity laws last week. HB 2492 and HB 2243, sponsored by Senator Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek) when he was in the State House, were enacted in 2022. Far left groups along with the DNC, the Arizona Democratic Party, and the Biden Administration’s DOJ Civil Rights Division filed lawsuits challenging the laws. HB 2492 required voters to provide documented proof of citizenship (DPOC) in order to vote in the presidential election or by mail, and in order to register to vote in state and local elections. HB 2243 required county recorders to regularly clean the voter rolls to remove noncitizens. The panel held that the laws violated the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Civil Rights Act.
State Senate President Warren Petersen (R-Mesa) posted on X that he would be appealing the decision to the Supreme Court.
“It’s a new year but we have the same, old Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, playing familiar games of judicial activism,” he said in a statement. “Mere months after being overturned by the Supreme Court in this matter, the Ninth Circuit shockingly ignored the Constitution by blazing an independent trail to reach a very different conclusion. This radicalism undermines confidence in our judicial system, and it has negative consequences for the fabric of our Republic. Legislative Republicans are already working to return to the Supreme Court in defense of Arizona election integrity, and we intend to win.”
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC), which helped draft the legislation, issued a statement denouncing the “outrageous” ruling. “It’s clear this circuit court panel is motivated by radical ideology, and not the impartial judgment of the law,” said Scot Mussi, President of AFEC. “After months of legal wrangling over this law, and clear guidance from the nation’s high court, the Ninth Circuit still wrongly believes that it is the final arbiter of the U.S. Constitution and our laws. This ruling will continue to sow doubt into our system of government and will cost much more in taxpayer dollars thanks to the emergency appeal that will be again filed at the U.S. Supreme Court.”
The legal challenges, which were consolidated as Mi Familia v. Fontes, have taken a winding path through the courts. First, a panel on the Ninth Circuit ruled that election officials could reject state voter registration applications that did not have accompanying DPOC, allowing the proof-of-citizenship requirement for state-voter registration forms. However, a second appeals panel overturned that decision two weeks later, and an emergency appeal was filed with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rejected the second decision, allowing the DPOC requirement to go into effect during the fall election until last week’s new Ninth Circuit ruling.
The 156-page opinion, which included a dissent almost as long as the majority’s opinion, was authored by Judge Ronald M. Gould, who was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton and joined by Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw, another Clinton appointee. Judge Patrick J. Bumatay, who was appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump, dissented.
The opinion heavily relied on a 2018 agreement known as the LULAC Consent Decree that was entered into by then-Secretary of State Michele Reagan, which election integrity experts label a mistake since they believe the state could have defeated the lawsuit filed by the far left group, League of United Latin American Citizens. That agreement required county recorders to register otherwise eligible voters for federal elections regardless of whether they provided DPOC.
The panel remanded the case to the trial court judge, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Bolton, who was appointed to the bench by Clinton and known for progressive rulings such as striking down much of Arizona’s 2010 broad law against illegal immigration, SB 1070.
