Tuesday, December 3, 2019

NEW: AZ Supreme Court Told Opponents' Absurdity Argument Is a Non Sequitur, Morrissey Recall Effort Fell Short

The Arizona Supreme Court should agree that a group trying to recall Payson Mayor Tom Morrissey fell short of gathering the necessary signatures because the Town Clerk incorrectly calculated the number of petition signatures needed.

Last week, AZ Law presented the opening brief by Unite Payson. Morrissey's answering brief was filed on Thanksgiving eve and is published below. Attorney Tim La Sota is defending the trial court's decision to use the vote total from Morrissey's 2018 primary election victory to calculate the number of recall signatures needed to force the March 2020 election, rather than reaching back to the 2002 general election.

Arizona's Constitution uses the phrase "the last preceding general election." Payson, like many other towns and cities, uses a two-part, non-partisan election; Payson, calls the first election a "primary", but if a candidate gets a majority of the votes cast, then that person is elected as the mayor without a second, "general" election.

La Sota argues "if a candidate is elected at what would otherwise be a primary election, that election is not a primary election and must be a general election." And, he suggests that Unite Payson's absurdity argument is a non sequitor, and that its brief is "at times contradictory".

Both sides reach back to the intent of the framers of the Arizona Constitution to bolster their views of how the Supreme Court Justices should rule. Morrissey believes "The Arizona Constitution was not really written with “top two” elections in mind, where candidates are often elected at the first election. Instead, it was written from the statewide standpoint, where there is a partisan primary (at
which no candidates are actually elected) followed by a November general election."

As an expedited election matter, the case will be decided soon, without oral argument. The Supreme Court Communications Director Aaron Nash tells AZ Law he is not yet sure when the justices will get together to reach a decision. (i.e. whether it will be placed on a set conference calendar or considered separately asap)


* * * * *

"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. (Sun Sounds is 

"AZ Law" can also be downloaded and subscribed to in all major podcast stores - iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Podbean, etc.



No comments:

Post a Comment

EIGHT IS ENOUGH: List of Possible Arizona Supreme Court Justices Cut In Half, Public Input Requested

And then there were eight. Arizona Supreme Court Chief Justice Ann Timmer convened a rare meeting of the Commission on Appellate Court Appoi...