Read Blog for Arizona | Politics from a Liberal Viewpoint for more about voting rights

9th Circuit Court of Appeals to hear ballot collection appeal today (Updated)

October 20, 2016October 19, 2016 by AZ BlueMeanie

The AP reports today that the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court to consider blocking ballot-collection law:

A federal appeals panel that rejected a Democratic effort to block a new Arizona law barring groups from collecting early ballots from voters now has expedited a full hearing on the request.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has scheduled arguments for Wednesday. Last week, a panel summarily rejected an emergency injunction request. But late Friday, the three judges on the panel decided to expedite a full hearing on the Democrats’ request. The previous schedule called for hearings well after the Nov. 8 general election.

Appellants’ Emergency Motion Under Circuit Rule 27-3 For Injunction Pending Appeal And for Expedited Appeal(.pdf), Feldman v. Arizona Secretary of State’s Office, (No. 16-16865) 10/18/2016.

A different three-judge panel is set to hear the case.

The new law signed by Republican Gov. Doug Ducey earlier this year means people who collect mail-in ballots in most cases face a felony charge.

Courts deny Democrats’ requests to block GOP voter suppression in Arizona

October 12, 2016 by AZ BlueMeanie

Two federal courts have denied Democrats’ requests for a stay of GOP voter suppression in Arizona for this election. The case-in-chief will continue. Judges deal double blows to Democrats’ voting challenges:

Federal judges dealt double blows to Democrats’ efforts to challenge Arizona election laws Tuesday, with an appeals court panel refusing to block a new law prohibiting get-out-the-vote groups from collecting early ballots and a U.S. District Court judge declining to order Arizona to count votes cast in the wrong precinct.

The rulings came in different parts of the same lawsuit filed by Democratic voters and national and state Democratic groups, along with presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. It was filed after major problems with long lines during the March presidential primary election and the signing of the new ballot collection law by Republican Gov. Doug Ducey.

In the ballot collection portion, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to overturn a decision by U.S. District Court Judge Douglas Rayes that kept the new law in effect. It means people who collect ballots for delivery to the polls in most cases face a felony charge.

Democrats settle lawsuit over long lines at polling locations in Maricopa County

September 11, 2016September 9, 2016 by AZ BlueMeanie

Press release from the DNC Press:

Democrats Settle Election Dispute with the State of Arizona

The Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Ann Kirkpatrick for Arizona, the Arizona Democratic Party, Hillary for America, and Sanders, Inc., announced that they reached a settlement in their joint lawsuit against Maricopa County, Arizona that will make it easier for residents to vote.

Maricopa County miscalculated voter turnout and underestimated the number of vote centers needed to accommodate voters during the March presidential primaries. In the federal lawsuit, Democrats proffered a line expert explaining why Maricopa County’s allocation formulas were wrong, and offered a number of remedies. In response to the Democrats’ motion for an injunction, Maricopa County represented to the Court that it would be implementing many of those suggestions. In addition, as part of the settlement agreement, Maricopa County agreed to consider further recommendations from line experts to better ensure that voters will not again be subject to unacceptably long lines as a result of unsupported allocation decisions.

“This is a great victory for Arizonans, and for our democracy. The right to vote is our most fundamental right – the right that protects all of our other rights – and Democrats will never waver in ensuring that each and every eligible citizen can be heard at the ballot box. We know that long lines depress turnout. If a mother is forced to choose between waiting in line for hours to vote, or picking up her kids from daycare, the vote is going to lose every time. Stories like that were all too common in last spring’s election. It was wrong then, and it is easily avoidable in the future.

SCOTUS 4-4 tie works in favor of voting rights in North Carolina

August 31, 2016 by AZ BlueMeanie

The death of Justice Antonin Scalia continues to pay dividends.

The state of North Carolina, which enacted the “most discriminatory election law in the nation,” petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the ruling of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which last month struck down the state law.

Amy Howe at SCOTUSblog reports, North Carolina comes up one vote short for stay in election law case:

A closely divided Court today denied North Carolina’s request to allow the state to enforce three provisions of its controversial 2013 election law when voters go to the polls for this fall’s general elections. The state needed five of the eight Justices to agree to halt a lower court’s ruling that blocked the law, but it came up one short – illustrating the impact of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, who likely would have joined the Court’s other conservative Justices in voting for the state.

The North Carolina legislature enacted the law in the wake of the Court’s 2013 ruling in Shelby County v. Holder, which struck down the federal formula used to determine which state and local governments must obtain advance approval for any changes to their voting rules. The law would require North Carolina voters to show a government-issued photo ID, reduce the number of days for early voting, and eliminate out-of-precinct voting, same-day voter registration, and preregistration for young voters.

A federal trial court upheld the law against claims that it was racially discriminatory. But in late July of this year, a federal appeals court barred the state from enforcing the law. The court of appeals rejected the state’s explanation that the law was intended to combat voter fraud and “promote public confidence in the election system.” Rather, the court of appeals concluded, the law “hinges explicitly on race—specifically its concern that African Americans, who had overwhelmingly voted for Democrats, had too much access to” voting.

A simple change in the law is needed for citizens initiatives, referendums and recalls

August 22, 2016 by AZ BlueMeanie

Arizona revised its election laws a few years ago to create the E-Qual system which allows a voter to sign a candidate’s petition and to donate Clean Elections $5 contributions online:

With E-Qual, you can show your support for a candidate from the comfort of your home or anywhere internet access is available.

In Arizona, candidates are required to obtain a minimum number of petition signatures to appear on a ballot. Voters interested in assisting Statewide and Legislative candidates can now sign a petition electronically.

Clean Elections candidates are required to obtain $5 qualifying contributions from registered voters to qualify for public funding. Voters may now contribute a $5 qualifying contribution with E-Qual.

Click on a box below to get started now!

Do you know what E-Qual does not allow a voter to do? Sign petitions for citizens initiatives, referendums and recalls.

“Why” you ask? Because our authoritarian Tea-Publican legislature really does not want the citizens of this state exercising their constitutionally guaranteed right to citizens initiatives, referendums and recalls. They want to make it as difficult and costly as possible to deter voters from exercising their constitutional rights, because it is a direct challenge to their legislative authority and control.

Referring measures to the ballot is the exclusive provenance of our Tea-Publican controlled legislature and their right-wing allies, dontcha know?