"AZ Law" is a new, nonprofit journalism effort covering Arizona's courts, legal system and laws. "AZ Law" is now airing on Sun Sounds of Arizona. Our sister website can be found at ArizonasPolitics.com. Your ideas for articles, programs, etc. are welcome, at "Paul.Weich.AZlaw-at-gmail.com".
The last Biden judicial pick to get approved for the U.S. District Court bench may well be Arizona's Sharad Desai, we learned today. During a brief, sometimes-testy meeting today, the Senate Judiciary Committee recommended Desai to the full Senate, and there is reason to think that outgoing Arizona Senator Kyrsten Sinema is the reason.
Before that vote, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis blasted the Biden Administration and warned his Democratic colleagues on the committee to not vote for the White House's pick for the 4th Circuit. He warned payback in the coming session, when Trump begins nominating judges that Democrats do not like. Ryan Park then passed out of the committee on an 11-10 party line vote.
Desai was then the only District Court nominee (of seven) to get a committee vote. Chair Dick Durbin (D-IL) announced it as a voice vote, and only one Republican sounded a "nay". But, then, seven of the committee's ten Republicans went on the record as opposing Desai.
The Tillis tirade included a claim that he was certain that he has the votes to defeat 4th Circuit nominee Ryan Park on the floor. That would require at least one member of the Democratic caucus to vote against him.
Tillis then was not one of the Republicans voting against Desai, leading one longtime Judiciary Committee watcher to hypothesize that Sinema is a key Democratic vote against Park. (Sinema and Tillis have worked together on other measures, too.)
(We were unable to reach Senator Sinema for comment. We will update this article as warranted.)
The Senate typically brings the nominees to the floor in roughly the order they are presented by the Judiciary Committee. Which means that Arizona's Desai may be the final District Court Judge to get a vote in the next few weeks.
Desai would come to the bench from Honeywell, where he is a VP/General Counsel. Mr. Desai was recommended to the White House by both Sinema and Sen. Mark Kelly. His sister, Roopali Desai, is a 9th Circuit judge; she was also nominated by Biden.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
The Arizona Free Enterprise Club and Center for Arizona Policy today lost their appeal claiming that the Voters' Right to Know Act ("VRKA", also known as "Stop Dark Money") violated their constitutional rights.
A unanimous three judge panel soundly rejected the groups' arguments that the disclosure measure - which just completed its first election cycle in effect - violated Arizona's constitutional protections for free speech, association and for private affairs. They claimed that donors and potential donors would be (or were) harassed because they could no longer hide their identities. (The measure calls for disclosure of the original source of funds from the largest donors for ads and other communications.)
The opinion concludes the VRKA did not violate the provisions either as written or as applied to CAP or AZFEC.
Former Arizona Attorney General, who chaired the multi-year Stop Dark Money effort, tells Arizona's Law that today's opinion is "a very thorough, well-reasoned and well-written opinion that takes each of the claimants' positions systematically and demolishes them. This vindicates the careful work we put into drafting it." He notes the long list of dark money groups active in Arizona that filed friend of the court briefs attacking the law.
It is likely that the groups will appeal this decision to the Arizona Supreme Court. A separate challenge to the VRKA's constitutionality is also in the appeals process.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Abraham Hamadeh, who unsuccessfully ran to be Arizona Attorney General in 2022 today AVOIDED
sanctions in his "untimely election constest" filed in 2023. Hamadeh and his attorney, Ryan Heath, sued Maricopa County and the Secretary of State (Adrian Fontes), claiming they violated voters' constitutional rights due to some long lines caused by printer/tabulator issues.
Citing this year's Arizona Supreme Court decision reversing sanctions against the Arizona Republican Party for a dismissed 2020 case, Judge Scott Blaney found that he could not find that the case was sanctionable.
Hamadeh is currently running for U.S. Congress.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Rudy Giuliani and his Arizona attorney want to try to show that the Arizona Grand Jury that indicted him and 17 others in the so-called fake electors case earlier this year was politically stacked against the Republican group. Today, the judge largely shut down his efforts.
Here is the Motion from Giuliani and his attorney (Mark Williams), the State's Response and Judge Bruce Cohen's decision.
The trial for the remaining 16 defendants - which includes 10 of the 11 Arizona Republicans who signed the false document and several Trump attorneys and advisors - is scheduled for January 2026.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
UPDATE, 9/20, 6:15pm: BREAKING, VICTORY: AZ Supreme Court REFUSES to Order Recorders To Move 98,000 Long-time Arizonans To Fed-Only List Weeks Before Ballots Hit the Mail
Commends @stephen_richer, @Adrian_Fontes for bringing it to them quickly
Update, 4:50pm: The Arizona Supreme Court is moving fast. The Secretary of State's Response is due by 4:00pm tomorrow. (Fontes already had declared that he is ready to file it by then.) Any amicus (aka friend of the court) briefs are also due by then, and the Justices will quickly decide whether to accept this emergency Special Action.
************
Original article, 9/17: "BREAKING: Maricopa County Recorder Files Action In AZ Supreme Court, Could Force 97,000 Long-Time Voters To Present Proof of Citizenship Or Lose Ballot Access"
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer has filed an emergency action with the Arizona Supreme Court today, seeking guidance on what to do about 97,000 voters (statewide) who are impacted by a just-discovered glitch in the Motor Vehicle Department's system.
The voters may have long been assumed to have presented documented proof of citizenship to MVD because they received a duplicate license, and the "issuance date" was updated. Therefore, County Recorders believed that MVD had verified citizenship status when it may not have.
Richer asks the Justices for guidance on whether or not he should switch those people - more than 50,000 in Maricopa County - from the full-ballot status they have had to only being able to vote a "federal-only" ballot (President, Senate, House of Representatives)... unless they immediately provide proof of citizenship.
Secretary of State Adrian Fontes notes that federal law prohibits counties from conducting voter list maintenance within 90 days of an election. This would definitely apply. He also notes today that most of those impacted are 45-60years old, and more are Republican than Democrat.
In 2004, Arizonans passed a proposition that required the proof of citizenship - instead of simply swearing under penalty of law that you are a citizen. The U.S. Supreme Court then ruled that such a requirement violated federal laws, and Arizona came up with a unique system that gave full ballot status to those who provided the proof, and "fed-only" status to those who used the federal voter registration form AND did not provide proof.
Because Arizona's Motor Vehicle Division has required proof of citizenship for most drivers - non-citizens have a separate class of driver's license which will (also) not permit voter registration - Arizonans filling out the federal form but writing their AZ DL number down are checked and given full ballot status.
The reset of the issuance date of the driver's license when someone gets a replacement license meant that County Recorders confirmed full-ballot statuts for 97,000 people who had not provided MVD with proof.
Soooo, this may apply to Arizonans who had their AZDL (or, ID) before 2004, BUT they registered to vote - or, re-registered after moving (from county to county - post-2004. AND, their DL had been updated and showed a post-1996 issuance date.
Richer is represented by Snell & Wilmer.
The Emergency Action attaches communications between the parties from yesterday and today. We also obtained those documents from the Secretary of State pursuant to a public records request. (Published below.)
This is only one of the moving pieces surrounding Arizona's unique bifurcated ballot statuses. Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that Recorders REJECT new voter registration applications submitted on the state's application that do not include a (qualifying) AZDL or attached proof of citizenship, but to ACCEPT the same potential voter (with fed-only status) if they use the federal application.
Meanwhile, groups are hurriedly trying to assist "fed-only" voters to "cure" their status so that they can vote a full ballot. (I assisted several voters with that yesterday, in fact.)
Here is an explanatory news conference from Secretary of State Fontes:
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Mark Meadows, President Donald Trump's Chiefs of Staff in the White House in late 2020, will continue to face criminal charges in Arizona state court. U.S. District Court Judge John Tuchi today declined to accept Meadows' effort to remove the case to federal court.
In a 15-page Order, Tuchi finds that Meadows filed his Notice of Removal more than two weeks past the deadline, and did not present good cause for that tardiness. Meadows had claimed that he was waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Trump immunity case. However, Tuchi decided that that was not a reason for not filing the Notice on time.
The judge went on to consider the substantive issue behind Meadows' request, anyway. Tuchi noted that Arizona's indictment of Meadows was because of his alleged activities in furthering the plan to have Arizona Republicans come up with a false declaration of their electors being Arizona's official electors. Therefore, Meadows' description of his Chief of Staff duties of simply being a liaison to the President did not hold water. "Mr. Meadows has not so much removed the State’s indictment as rewritten it," he wrote.
"Although the Court credits Mr. Meadows’s theory that the Chief of Staff is responsible for acting as the President’s gatekeeper, that conclusion does not create a causal nexus between Mr. Meadows’s official authority and the charged conduct.7 Therefore, because the Court concludes that the conduct charged in the State’s prosecution does not relate to Mr. Meadows’s color of former office, the Court must remand this case to state court for want of subject-matter jurisdiction."
Trial in the state court for Meadows and the Arizona's alleged "fake electors" is set for January, 2026.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
The Arizona Supreme Court DISMISSED in quick order a Special Action Petition filed by the Arizona Republican Party challenging two election-related Executive Orders issued last year by Governor Katie Hobbs. The Executive Orders encouraged Arizona counties to make use of state facilities for polling places and drop boxes.
Chief Justice Ann Timmer's Order scolded the party for not justifying filing the action directly with the Supreme Court, and for why it waited so long after the Executive Orders were issued. The attorney for the AZGOP was Andrew Gould, one of Timmer's former colleagues on the Supreme Court bench.
The Court concludes that Petitioners have not presented adequate justification for the action to commence in this Court rather than the superior court. The issues raised in the special action petition will not be mooted by the November 2024 election. We further note that Petitioners have not addressed why neither EO was challenged until this point in time. An earlier challenge would have permitted the Petitioners to secure a final ruling well before the upcoming election.
The Supreme Court declined to award attorneys' feesto the Governor, who hired Arizona election law attorney Andy Gaona to defeat the petition.
The Republican Party can choose to refile the action in a lower court.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
Mohave County Supervisor Ron Gould cannot get legal immunity in advance for voting to hand count all upcoming election ballots. His lawsuit against Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes was dismissed today by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Brad Astrowsky.
Gould filed the declaratory judgment action early this year, after Mayes had advised the Mohave County Board that conducting a full hand count would be against Arizona laws (that Gould had helped shape as a former lawmaker).
The case was dismissed before trial because Gould's rights as one Supervisor were not yet impacted (because his fellow Supervisors voted against a full hand count). "Supervisor Gould cannot seek relief that can only be sought through collective action of the Board, if it can be sought at all," wrote Astrowsky.
The judge did not assess attorneys' fees sanctions against Gould because the statute the AG's attorneys used to ask for the fees only applies when one government (official) sues another. Astrowsky noted that the AG had earlier argued that Gould was only suing as a (non-official) individual.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
A semi-retired Arizona Supreme Court Justice and two other retired Arizona judges comprise the highest level of arbitrators in a privately-owned, semi-autonomous, Ayn Rand-inspired city on a Honduran island. The New York Times Magazine reports this week that "Próspera" also is in a battle for survival with the current Honduran government.
Retired Justice John Pelander is one of the three "Senior Arbiters" for the Próspera Arbitration Center and heads the "Appellate Division". PAC is essentially the judicial branch for the ZEDE ("Zone for Employment and Economic Development") "backed by the Silicon Valley billionaires Peter Thiel, Sam Altman and Marc Andreessen". Earlier this month, Arizona's Law reported that Pelander had been given a one-year contract by the Arizona Supreme Court to handle cases on a part-time, as needed basis.
The Administrative Order (below) details that he receive a fixed part-time salary of approximately $24,000. He participated, for example, in the two expedited appeals involving Arizona's abortion rights ballot measure. (He was in the majorities keeping the measure on the ballot, and permitting the Legislature to include the term "unborn human being" to describe a fetus in the "impartial analysis".)
Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Timmer tells Arizona's Law that Pelander's Honduran quasi-judgeship does not give her "cause for concern." Arizona's Code of Judicial Conduct would not permit a full-time judge or justice to moonlight like that, but it specifically exempts either a "retired judge available for assignment" or a part-time judge from those restrictions.
The long-form NY Times Magazine (worth the read) contained this attention-grabbing nugget: "An arbitration center staffed by three retired Arizona judges handles dispute resolution. (In order to enter the jurisdiction, I was told I needed to sign an “agreement of coexistence” binding myself to 4,202 pages of rules, violations of which would be subject to the jurisdictional authority of the arbitration center.)"
A quick search revealed that the other two Arizonans making up Próspera's "Supreme Court" are retired Court of Appeals Judge John Gemmill and retired Superior Court Judge Kenneth Mangum. (Mangum is also a Board Member.) The Arbitration Center lists several other attorneys as "Arbiters" and "Arbitral Officers", with only the Arizonans at the highest of the three levels.
The article and website also set out other Arizona ties to Próspera - the Founder/CEO is listed as "Arizona entrepreneur Erick Brimen", and the Co-Chair of the Arbitration Center is former Goldwater Institute General Counsel Nick Dranias.
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
The Arizona Supreme Court has now blessed the Republican Legislative Council's "impartial analysis" of both citizens' initiatives appearing on November's ballot. After previously allowing "unborn human being" instead of "fetus", the Justices today reversed the Superior Court judge's decision that the analysis "misleadingly" elevates and characterizes the ranked choice voting provisions of the Open Primaries (aka Make Elections Fair Arizona) initiative.
(This is a developing story. Please check back later for more details.)
This article was reported by AZ Law founder Paul Weich.
"AZ Law" includes articles, commentaries and updates about opinions from the Arizona Supreme Court, U.S. Supreme Court, as well as trial and appellate courts, etc. AZ Law is founded by Phoenix attorney Paul Weich, and joins Arizona's Politics on the internet.
AZ Law airs on non-profit Sun Sounds of Arizona, a statewide reading service that provides audio access to printed material for people who cannot hold or read print material due to a disability. If you know someone who could benefit from this 24/7 service, please let them know about member-supported Sun Sounds. And, YOU can donate or listen here.
Previous episodes of AZ Law can be streamed or downloaded here, or wherever you get your podcasts.
