Kari Lake remains confident in victory as court deems Maricopa County signature verification illegal.
Conservative firebrand Kari Lake is feeling highly confident in her upcoming trial after a judge ruled that Maricopa County’s signature verification process was unlawful.
Yavapai County Superior Court Judge John Napper recently issued a ruling deeming some of Arizona’s signature verification procedures in violation of state law. In response, Ms. Lake released a statement on Sept. 6, expressing her “utmost confidence” in her election-related legal dispute against Arizona state officials.
“Following this ruling, I have the utmost confidence that we will win our lawsuit to review the early ballot signatures later this month,” Ms. Lake said in the statement.
Ms. Lake’s legal dispute against Arizona state officials stems from claims that she was robbed of victory in November 2022 due to alleged improper ballot signature verification procedures.
Several courts ruled against her, but she appealed and the Arizona Supreme Court recently decided that her appeal is now due for a Sept. 21 trial. This trial will allow her concerns about signature verification issues to be aired and considered by the court.
Ms. Lake’s statement expressing confidence that she’ll prevail at trial comes after Judge John Napper issued a ruling last week (pdf) in a lawsuit against Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes brought by public interest group Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections (RITE).
The group alleged that Mr. Fontes broke the law regarding mail-in ballot signature verification procedures. Specifically, the group argued that Mr. Fontes’ interpretation of “registration record” in the Secretary of State’s Elections Procedures Manual was unreasonably broad and improperly expanded the pool of signatures to which an early ballot affidavit signature could be compared, increasing the risk of false positives.
“While state law requires county recorders to match mail-ballot signatures with signatures in the voter’s ‘registration record,’ the Secretary instructed them to use a broader and less reliable universe of comparison signatures,” RITE said in a Sept. 5 statement on the court ruling.
“That means the Secretary was requiring ballots to be counted despite using a signature that did not match anything in the voter’s registration record. This was a clear violation of state law,” the group added.
In her statement on the ruling, Ms. Lake expressed relief that the judge ruled that Arizona’s signature matching process is unlawful.
“Maricopa County’s complete abandonment of signature verification standards has allowed for the integrity of our elections to be washed away,” Ms. Lake said.
“Election laws aren’t suggestions or guidelines, they’re the law,” she continued, adding that she’s thankful the court “reminded” Mr. Fontes about that fact.
Mr. Fontes’ office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the ruling.
‘Registration Record’ Definition in Focus
Court documents show that Mr. Fontes argued that the legal definition of “registration record” is ambiguous and so he is entitled to provide guidance on its interpretation.
“Does the legislature’s use of the expansive term registration ‘record’ really mean the more restrictive (but unused) term registration ’form’ for purposes of verifying a signature on an early voted ballot,” reads a motion to dismiss (pdf) the RITE lawsuit filed by Mr. Fontes’ attorneys.
“The answer is ‘no,'” the attorneys argued, listing reasons that include the secretary of state’s statutory authority to conduct elections fairly and impartially.
The judge disagreed with the reasoning, however, arguing that there’s little scope for ambivalence in Arizona election law.
“This argument fails because there is no ambiguity in the statute,” Judge Napper wrote in his opinion.
He added that the Arizona “statute is clear and unambiguous” in that it requires the recorder to “review the voter’s registration card” and not other documents bearing the voter’s signature.
Judge Napper also noted that Mr. Fontes’ signature-matching process in the Election Procedures Manual “contradicts the plain language” of Arizona elections laws by allowing signature matching with documents that have “nothing to do with the act of registering.”
After weighing arguments, the judge denied Mr. Fontes’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit.
Derek Lyons, CEO of RITE, issued a statement calling Judge Napper’s ruling a “huge victory toward securing the elections that Arizonans deserve, which are elections they can trust.”
“RITE will build on this victory to continue to fight in court for elections that are administered according to democratically enacted laws, not illegal partisan commands,” he added.
The group said in a statement that the ruling shows that Mr. Fontes must change his signature verification procedures before the next election to ”protect the integrity of Arizona’s mail-in balloting process” or face further legal consequences.
While Ms. Lake has expressed confidence that the ruling will impact her chances of prevailing at trial at the end of September, the implication
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
