Arizona Judge Declines Request to Improve Election Security, Citing Timing

Arizona has the dubious distinction of leading the nation in headlines noting serious examples of election fraud. Casting even more doubt on the integrity of the election process, an Arizona judge has rejected the state attorney general’s request to revise election rules to safeguard future elections.

On June 17, Yavapai County Superior Court Judge John Napper denied the request to impose changes for the 2022 election cycle, citing timing.

Republican Attorney General Mark Brnovich initiated the request for change by contacting Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, and calling for improvements to election procedures for the 2022 elections. As Hobbs was not inclined to advocate reforms, the request was elevated to the superior court.

The Associated Press reported on Napper’s ruling:

“At this point in the game, there is no mechanism for the Court to assist the parties in constructing an EMP which complies with [the law] within the timelines of the statute. The Complaint was filed far too late for this to occur without disrupting elections that have already begun.”

The Epoch Times reports, “The judge’s rejection marked the end of the AG’s complaint first filed against Hobbs in April, in which he alleged that Hobbs refused to make changes in the elections procedures manual.”

An excerpt from Brnovich’s court filing dated April 21 reads: 

“This case is about the Secretary’s ongoing violation of her mandatory statutory duty to promulgate an Elections Procedures Manual (“EPM”) for the 2022 election cycle. To cure that ongoing violation, Plaintiffs are entitled to special action relief ordering the Secretary to comply with the mandatory requirement of providing a legally-compliant EPM to the AG and Governor for approval.”

In a statement released on June 10 by Brnovich’s office, Hobbs was asked again to amend the election procedures manual by adding election integrity measures, including “prohibiting unstaffed drop boxes, requiring signature verification for non-mailed early ballots, and preserving the requirement that voters vote in their precinct.”

Brnovich referred to the situation as especially “problematic” because the elections procedure manual has the “force of law.”

Elaborating, Brnovich said: “Regardless of individual politics or party, everyone should understand the importance of maintaining public confidence in our elections. I brought suit to support confidence in the integrity of our elections and accuracy of the results.”

Arizona is becoming a focal point for questioning election integrity. Multiple lawsuits have been filed, ballots have been misplaced or not counted, and earlier this month, state Senate and House lawmakers heard evidence from True The Vote claiming there was a statewide ballot harvesting campaign during the 2020 presidential election.

Just days after the hearing, Guillermina Fuentes, a former mayor, was convicted on voter fraud charges. Fuentes pleaded guilty to using her position in the Democratic Party to harvest ballots.

According to the Times report, True the Vote “presented evidence of cellphone tracking data showing that more than 200 devices had visited ballot drop boxes in two of the state’s largest counties no less than 5,700 times during the 2020 election.”

Ensuring that cellphone tracking data would exclude the regular comings and goings of people, Catherine Engelbrecht, founder and president of True the Vote, said, “the group’s investigators settled on 10 visits as ‘outlier behavior’ on the side of too many visits to the ballot box.” 

However, what True the Vote found is that on average the “mules” or “ballot harvesters” they tracked in Arizona visited polling sites on average of 21 times. Engelbrecht called it “extreme outlier behavior” and clear evidence of systemic voter fraud.

“Based on our research,” Engelbrecht said, “the ‘Arizona model’ is one that is followed across the country, and it involves national organizations.”

Engelbrecht warned: 

“So we, the American people, need to continue the pressure on to continue investigations moving forward to get to the bottom of what’s happening, not just in Yuma County, Arizona, but in many counties across this country.”