In a recent legal ruling, the Arizona Court of Appeals found that Secretary of State Adrian Fontes violated state law by allowing only 15 days for public feedback on the 2023 Elections Procedures Manual, instead of the legally required 30 days.
Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Against Secretary of State on Elections Procedures Manual
Arizona Court of Appeals Rules Against Secretary of State on Elections Procedures Manual
Legal ruling highlights procedural flaws in public comment period for election guidelines
In a noteworthy legal decision, the Arizona Court of Appeals has ruled that Secretary of State Adrian Fontes contravened state regulations by limiting the public comment period for the 2023 Elections Procedures Manual (EPM) to just 15 days, rather than the mandated 30 days. This ruling represents a procedural win for the Republican National Committee (RNC), the Arizona Republican Party, and the Yavapai County Republican Party, who had collectively contested the manual's implementation process.
**Court’s Findings**
The appellate court determined that the EPM falls under the Arizona Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which stipulates a minimum 30-day period for public commentary on new regulatory measures. By only providing half of that timeframe, Secretary Fontes was found to have not “substantially complied” with the APA’s requirements. The court overturned a prior judgment from the Maricopa County Superior Court that had dismissed the complaints, reinstating the case for additional proceedings.
**Implications for Election Procedures**
The EPM is a critical document for county election officials, covering vital processes such as voter eligibility, polling logistics, and the verification and auditing of election results. This recent court ruling raises questions about which version of the manual will be applicable for upcoming local elections, including those in Tucson and surrounding areas slated for later this year. While Secretary Fontes' office insists the 2023 manual stays effective during the appeal, the Arizona Republican Party argues that counties should revert to using the 2019 manual until the issues are resolved.
**Political Reactions**
Gina Swoboda, Chair of the Arizona Republican Party, commended the court's verdict, asserting, “Our public in Arizona has a right to a voice on most processes that doesn’t exist in other states.” She highlighted the necessity of following established legal frameworks in crafting election regulations. Conversely, Secretary Fontes’ office has voiced objections to the ruling and is preparing to appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, maintaining that the 2023 EPM continues to hold validity until the appellate court's findings are officially in force.
**Broader Context**
This case forms part of ongoing legal disputes regarding the 2023 EPM. In December 2024, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge invalidated multiple elements of the manual, including provisions concerning voter registration and election result certification, concluding that Secretary Fontes had exceeded his authority. The appellate court’s ruling emphasizes the importance for state officials to meticulously adhere to procedural norms when instituting election-related policies. As the legal process unfolds, this case is likely to have significant ramifications for future election administration in Arizona and could shape the development and enforcement of election procedures going forward.
**Court’s Findings**
The appellate court determined that the EPM falls under the Arizona Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which stipulates a minimum 30-day period for public commentary on new regulatory measures. By only providing half of that timeframe, Secretary Fontes was found to have not “substantially complied” with the APA’s requirements. The court overturned a prior judgment from the Maricopa County Superior Court that had dismissed the complaints, reinstating the case for additional proceedings.
**Implications for Election Procedures**
The EPM is a critical document for county election officials, covering vital processes such as voter eligibility, polling logistics, and the verification and auditing of election results. This recent court ruling raises questions about which version of the manual will be applicable for upcoming local elections, including those in Tucson and surrounding areas slated for later this year. While Secretary Fontes' office insists the 2023 manual stays effective during the appeal, the Arizona Republican Party argues that counties should revert to using the 2019 manual until the issues are resolved.
**Political Reactions**
Gina Swoboda, Chair of the Arizona Republican Party, commended the court's verdict, asserting, “Our public in Arizona has a right to a voice on most processes that doesn’t exist in other states.” She highlighted the necessity of following established legal frameworks in crafting election regulations. Conversely, Secretary Fontes’ office has voiced objections to the ruling and is preparing to appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, maintaining that the 2023 EPM continues to hold validity until the appellate court's findings are officially in force.
**Broader Context**
This case forms part of ongoing legal disputes regarding the 2023 EPM. In December 2024, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge invalidated multiple elements of the manual, including provisions concerning voter registration and election result certification, concluding that Secretary Fontes had exceeded his authority. The appellate court’s ruling emphasizes the importance for state officials to meticulously adhere to procedural norms when instituting election-related policies. As the legal process unfolds, this case is likely to have significant ramifications for future election administration in Arizona and could shape the development and enforcement of election procedures going forward.
