- Watch The JD Rucker Show every day to be truly informed.
(The Epoch Times)—The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Friday that nearly 98,000 people whose proof of citizenship documents had not been confirmed can vote in state and local races.
The court’s decision comes after officials discovered that a database error allowed people who had not provided proof of citizenship, per a 2004 ballot initiative, to vote the full ballot for nearly 20 years.
Neither the county recorder nor the state’s top election official suspected the affected voters were not U.S. citizens. However, they disagreed on what status the voters should hold.
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, a Republican, filed an emergency petition on Sept. 17 asking the state Supreme Court to weigh in.
Richer challenged guidance from Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, a Democrat, regarding voters who may not have provided documentary proof of citizenship during registration.
The state Supreme Court found in favor of Fontes, saying that Richer did not demonstrate that county recorders have statutory authority to remove the affected voters from being able to cast ballots in the 2024 election for federal offices and matters on a state ballot.
Important: Our sponsors at Jase are now offering emergency preparedness subscription medications on top of the long-term storage antibiotics they offer. Use promo code “Rucker10” at checkout!
Arizona residents have been required to provide documentary proof of citizenship to vote in elections since voters approved Proposition 200 in 2004. This rule, unique to Arizona, came into effect in 2005.
Voters are required to provide a driver’s license or tribal ID number or attach a copy of a birth certificate, passport, or naturalization documents in order to cast ballots in local and state races. Driver’s licenses issued after Oct. 1, 1996, are valid.
However, state officials said that an error between the state’s voter registration database and the Motor Vehicle Division meant that some 97,928 voters who held licenses from before Oct. 1, 1996, were marked as full-ballot voters.
At around 2.5 percent of all registered voters, this could tip the scales in hotly contested state legislature races, where Republicans hold a slim majority over Democrats. It could also impact ballot initiatives.
State election officials said nearly 98,000 voters’ Arizona driver’s licenses were incorrectly recorded with an issue date after the cutoff on Oct. 1, 1996. This happened because those voters received a duplicate or updated license that listed its issue date as the duplicate or updated date rather than the original date of issue.
Richer argued that the affected voters should be restricted to federal-only ballots until they provide documented proof of citizenship, in accordance with Proposition 200. Fontes, however, directed county recorders to take no action, stating the voters should be permitted to vote in all elections. Richer argued Fontes ignored state law by doing so.
Under Arizona law, once a voter’s application is accepted, it cannot be revoked unless the recorder has evidence that the individual is not a U.S. citizen, the justices said.
The justices said county officials lack the authority to change the voters’ status because they registered long ago and attested under penalty of law to be U.S. citizens. Furthermore, the voters aren’t at fault for the database error, according to the ruling.
The court also noted the close proximity to the November election and cautioned against changing election procedures shortly before voting begins, saying the time for county officials to reject the voters’ registrations has passed.
“We are unwilling on these facts to disenfranchise voters en masse from participating in state contests,” Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer said in the ruling.
The ruling was welcomed by both Richer and Fontes.
Richer took to social media to thank the court for quickly reviewing the case and Fontes for partnering with him to address the error.
“The 100k registrants will continue to vote a full ballot this election. Thank God,” Richer wrote on X. “Thank you Arizona Supreme Court for your extremely quick and professional review of this matter. Thank you [Fontes] for your partnership on this.”
Fontes thanked Richer and welcomed the win.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
What Would You Do If Pharmacies Couldn’t Provide You With Crucial Medications or Antibiotics?
The medication supply chain from China and India is more fragile than ever since Covid. The US is not equipped to handle our pharmaceutical needs. We’ve already seen shortages with antibiotics and other medications in recent months and pharmaceutical challenges are becoming more frequent today.
Our partners at Jase Medical offer a simple solution for Americans to be prepared in case things go south. Their “Jase Case” gives Americans emergency antibiotics they can store away while their “Jase Daily” offers a wide array of prescription drugs to treat the ailments most common to Americans.
They do this through a process that embraces medical freedom. Their secure online form allows board-certified physicians to prescribe the needed drugs. They are then delivered directly to the customer from their pharmacy network. The physicians are available to answer treatment related questions.
