Judge demands Arizona to disclose list of registered voters with questionable citizenship status
Arizona’s secretary of state is required to disclose a list of up to 218,000 voters affected by a glitch at the Motor Vehicles Division.
A judge has instructed Arizona to make public a list of registered voters whose citizenship status was not verified due to a coding glitch in the state’s record-keeping system.
Despite concerns about potential harassment, Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes has been ordered to provide the list by Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott A. Blaney.
A lawsuit, filed on behalf of EZAZ.org by America First Legal (AFL), aims to ensure transparency and the ability for county recorders to verify voters’ citizenship status.
The list, containing as many as 218,000 voters, includes individuals who did not provide proof of citizenship documents when registering, due to a flaw in the data systems managed by Arizona’s Motor Vehicles Division (MVD) and the secretary of state’s office.
This order is a result of Arizona’s ongoing efforts to comply with the voter eligibility requirements of Proposition 200, a law enforced in 2004 that demands proof of citizenship for voters in state and local elections.
The judge has set a deadline of Nov. 4 for Fontes to provide the list to EZAZ.org, with restrictions on how the information can be used. The watchdog group is prohibited from contacting any individuals on the list until Nov. 6 or sharing personally identifiable data with third parties, except for Arizona county recorders, the Legislature’s leadership, and members of the House and Senate Elections Committees.
In response to concerns about potential harassment, Fontes argued against releasing the list.
Despite Fontes’s arguments, the judge emphasized that Arizona’s public records law presumes disclosure unless there is a clear threat to the state’s interests or individual privacy.
“Thus, the public official seeking to withhold public records from disclosure bears the burden of overcoming the presumption favoring disclosure,” the judge wrote, noting that EZAZ.org has a history of following public engagement standards and has not misused sensitive voter data in the past.
Expert testimony regarding election-related threats was dismissed by the court as speculative and biased.
In response to the ruling, a spokesperson for Fontes’s office stated that they are reviewing the decision and considering their options.