The Supreme Court of Arizona just put an end to state Democrats’ so-called Free and Fair Elections Act, the Tucson Sentinel reports.
Contrary to what the act’s name would suggest, it was designed by Arizona Democrats to revoke several election-integrity measures that have been passed by Arizona’s legislature in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
The act’s supporters were trying to get the measure onto the upcoming ballot.
But, that effort has now been stopped.
The Supreme Court of Arizona has now ruled that the Free and Fair Elections Act will not be put on the ballots. This is because the state’s high court found that the measure failed to meet the signature threshold needed to get such a proposal onto the ballots.
“When the dust settled, the Arizona Free and Fair Elections Act, which sought to make sweeping changes to Arizona’s election and campaign finance laws, fell just 1,458 signatures short of qualifying for the November ballot,” the Tucson Sentinel reports.
This comes after Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Joseph Mikitish ruled that that measure actually had 2,281 more valid signatures than needed to be put on the ballot. It turns out, however, that this judge’s math wasn’t exactly up to snuff.
The Tucson Sentinel reports:
The [Arizona] Supreme Court said it was unable to verify Mikitish’s math and ordered him to clarify it on Friday morning. When he did, Mikitish revised his calculations and concluded that the initiative fell short, disqualifying it from the ballot. The Supreme Court affirmed that ruling a few hours later, despite an appeal from Arizonans for Free and Fair Elections, which backed the bill, claiming that Mikitish’s new math was flawed.
Arizona Democrats decried the ruling as “judicial interference” in their attempt to set up “direct democracy.”
They chalked the loss up to an “expanded and stacked [state] Supreme Court” that is controlled by Republicans.
Those opposing the measure, however, celebrated the ruling. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club, for example, put out a statement saying that the ruling “vindicates what we knew all along: the radical Free and Fair election initiative lacked enough lawful signatures to qualify for the ballot.” The club also accused the other side of trying to get the courts “to adopt a rigged methodology to calculate the final number of valid signatures.”
This one is a win for election integrity.