Monday, May 10, 2021

TODAY IN ELECTION AUDIT LEGAL NEWS: New State Senate GOP Subpoenas To County For Passwords & Routers, Anonymous Group Goes To AZ Supreme Court, More

 The political action surrounding the recount/audit by the Arizona State Senate/Cyber Ninjas continues to swirl. We are focusing on all of the related legal threads today. Check back for updates as we post updates and filings.

1) Arizona Democratic Party/Supervisor Gallardo v. Fann/Cyber Ninjas/etc: The parties reached a Settlement Agreement last week. Late Friday, they filed the Stipulation to Dismiss the case. (The agreement gives parties the right to go back to court if there are unaddressed breaches of the agreement.) The Stipulation is published below the jump.

2) A group of pro-Trump folks have anonymously filed a Special Action Petition with the Arizona Supreme Court. They also sent a letter to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich notifying him of their extreme effort to nullify all Arizona election results from the past two general elections (2018 and 2020). They acknowledge that state law only gives the AG the right to seek this type of remedy, but since  "you (are) on the list of inadvertent usurpers" they are filing it themselves.

Not only are they requesting that the court un-do the results of Arizona's 2018 and 2020 elections and Tucson's 2019 election, they are offering themselves as temporary replacements for all those suddenly-vacant offices. (In their Motion to keep their names secret "due to a reasonable fear for our safety because of the heightened rhetoric in Arizona", but they are willing to step forward once appointed by the court.) It should be noted that the anonymous group is not represented by legal counsel.

The gist of their argument is that the voting machines used by Arizona (and Tucson) have "invalid VSTLs and uncertified VSM equipment" and that the elections during that time are "illegal".

(Speaking of "inadvertent", please take a moment to appreciate the irony of slide #99 in their Powerpoint presentation to the Supreme Court Justices. BTW, they are the same Justices who were also on the 2018 and 2020 election ballots.)

Their filings - including more than 100 pages of "evidence" are published below the jump. Please check back soon for more information about those filings.

3) State Senate Republicans are issuing new subpoenas for the Maricopa County Supervisors and Sheriff Paul Penzone. They are seeking passwords and routers that the County did not turn over following their previous subpoena battle. (We will update once the subpoenas are issued and available.)

4) The "other red meat audit" saw some action last week. Check out our article here.

UPDATE, 3:30pm: Judge Kemp today granted the AZGOP's motion to dismiss the case. "Whether or not any chicanery took place in the voting process on January 23, this Court finds that it does not have judicial authority to intervene in an inter-party dispute...." Another lawsuit seeking to review all of the election documents and materials is still pending.

(The filings related to (2) are "below the jump". Please click on the "read more" button.)

 "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 podcast.

1 comment:

  1. The Stipulation of Dismissal WITH Prejudice does not say that the the Stipulation "... gives parties the right to go back to court if there are unaddressed breaches of the agreement." Is there an unpublished agreement that survives even after the stipulation dismissing "with prejudice"? Where is a copy of that agreement?

    Does Arizona law provide that "With Prejudice" means something squishy?


BACK AGAIN: U.S. Supreme Court Forced To Reconsider Arizona's Mystery Title 42 Case

When last we checked in with the status of Arizona v. Mayorkas,  a former Arizona Deputy Solicitor General was ready to argue the Title 42-r...