πŸ“° Get Friday UpdatesΒ  | πŸ“† Submit an EventΒ  | Β πŸ’Ό Add Your BusinessΒ  | πŸ“² Contact Us

Politics

Elections, local government, and the decisions that shape our community.

3 minutes reading time (670 words)

Prop. 144 Survives Two Court Challenges and Stays on the November Ballot

The Arizona Supreme Court cleared Proposition 144 twice in two days, and San Tan Valley area voters will decide it on Nov. 3.

The court ruled Aug. 18 that the measure does not violate the state constitution's rule against bundling separate amendments into one ballot question. It ruled again Aug. 19 that the description voters will read on the ballot can stand. Both rulings went against the challengers, and the measure stays on the ballot absent further order of the court.

SanTanValley.com reported in June that San Tan Valley area voters would decide on statewide election rules this November, after the Arizona Legislature gave final approval on June 12 to House Concurrent Resolution 2001, called the Arizona Secure Elections Act. That resolution is now Prop. 144.

The First Ruling: One Amendment or Six

The first case, Keating v. State, turned on a rule most voters have never heard of. Article XXI, Section 1 of the Arizona Constitution says a ballot measure containing more than one constitutional amendment has to be split so voters can decide each part separately. The idea is that you should not be forced to accept something you oppose in order to get something you want.

Randy Keating argued Prop. 144 does exactly that. The measure proposes six additions to the constitution, all dealing with how elections are run: citizen-only voter registration and voting, foreign national campaign contributions and spending, voter identification, the counting of eligible citizens' votes, on-site ballot tabulation, and authority to pass election laws tied to specified election-administration interests.

The court applied a two-part test, asking whether the provisions are topically related and whether they are sufficiently interrelated. The majority found all six concern election administration and share one objective: making sure elections are decided by eligible citizen voters and that eligible votes are counted accurately. It also found the provision granting authority to pass election laws is limited to the measure's own election-related purposes, rather than being an open-ended grant.

Vice Chief Justice John R. Lopez IV and Justices James P. Beene, William G. Montgomery and Kathryn H. King formed the majority. Chief Justice Ann A. Scott Timmer and Justice Maria Elena Cruz dissented.

The Second Ruling: What the Ballot Will Say

A separate challenge went after the wording rather than the substance. Three voters argued the descriptive title and the explanation voters will see are misleading.

The court rejected that challenge on Aug. 19. It found the three voters lacked standing, meaning they had not shown the distinct and palpable injury Arizona law requires before a court will hear a claim. It also found the descriptive title and voter explanation were not false or clearly misleading.

The lineup shifted between the two cases. Chief Justice Timmer, who dissented on Aug. 18, was in the majority on Aug. 19 along with Vice Chief Justice Lopez and Justices Beene and Cruz. Justices Montgomery and King, both in the Aug. 18 majority, dissented. Justice Bolick did not participate.

A Different Measure Is Coming Off the Ballot

On the same day it kept Prop. 144 alive, the court affirmed a ruling removing Proposition 145 from the November ballot, and it did so under the same rule Prop. 144 survived.

Prop. 145, from House Concurrent Resolution 2048, packaged two constitutional amendments. One would have protected military families' scholarship accounts from state confiscation. The other would have voided any law violating that protection and barred courts from preserving the lawful portions of an affected statute.

The court found those two provisions concern different sections of the constitution and differ in kind, so they were not connected closely enough to be a single measure. The decision was unanimous among the justices who took part. Justice Kathryn H. King did not participate.

What San Tan Valley Voters Do Next

Pinal County runs elections for the San Tan Valley area, including the Town of San Tan Valley. For the general election, the last day to register to vote is Oct. 5. Early voting begins Oct. 7. Election Day is Nov. 3.

Arizona Farms Road Lane Shifts Begin Wednesday, Ru...
Your Pinal County Library Card Includes Thousands ...

Related Posts

 

Comments

No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
October 6, 2026

Captcha Image

Β© 2026 SanTanValley.com. Β· Independently operated Β· All rights reserved
Site Developed & Managed by MyBizNow.com