Arizona SAVE Act Backers Sue, Say Secretary of State’s Ballot Language Is Misleading

Supporters of an Arizona version of the SAVE Act allege that the state’s top election official used loaded and inaccurate language to describe the measure when putting it on the November ballot.

A group of Arizona voters is suing the office of Democrat Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, alleging the office omitted key provisions, inserted political commentary, and made unsupported claims about the legal effect of Proposition 144, a proposed state constitutional amendment to add voter ID and proof of citizenship requirements in elections.

The Legislature referred the measure to Fontes’ office in the form of a four-page bill and did not propose a summary to use in ballot language. Plaintiffs contend the secretary of state is still required to provide neutral language in the summary, and are asking the court for new ballot language before early voting on the measure begins in October.

“Free and fair elections start with an honest ballot,” James Rogers, senior counsel at America First Legal, said in a statement. America First Legal is a watchdog and legal group representing the plaintiffs.

The Legislature’s proposed amendment stated that “only citizens may register and vote in Arizona’s elections,” but that language currently does not appear on the ballot, which only states that the amendment would require “proof of citizenship” and voter ID for elections.

Further, the amended ballot language says Proposition 144 would “lower the legal standard for judicial review of election laws, making it harder to challenge election laws in state court.” However, the proposal passed by the Legislature enshrines the right of voters and their elected representatives to adopt election laws and does not make it more difficult, the complaint states.

The proposed amendment also included a ban on foreign campaign donations in ballot referendums. However, the ballot language includes the phrase, “similar to prohibitions that already exist in federal law.” As the Federal Election Commission determined in 2021, there is no federal law prohibiting foreign contributions to ballot measures, only to candidates.

“Secretary Fontes had one job here: tell Arizona voters the truth about what’s on their ballot,” Rogers said. “Arizona law requires official ballot language to be impartial, accurate, and free from advocacy. Secretary Fontes’s description of Proposition 144 fails all these requirements.”

Fontes’s office did not respond to inquiries for this story by publication time.

The litigation comes as the SAVE America Act, a bill in the U.S. Congress requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID to vote in federal elections, is stalled in the Senate after passing the House multiple times.

The current ballot language reads in full:

“A ‘YES’ vote shall have the effect of amending the Arizona Constitution to: (1) require proof of citizenship to register to vote and identification to vote; (2) prohibit foreign nationals from making certain expenditures to influence elections, similar to prohibitions that already exist in federal law; (3) require ballots to be counted at the polling place where they are cast; (4) provide that the people and Legislature have the right to enact election laws; (5) require courts to presume election laws are constitutional; and (6) lower the legal standard for judicial review of election laws, making it harder to challenge election laws in state court.”