Arizona’s Republican Party, under the leadership of Gina Swaboda, is challenging Governor Katie Hobbs’ authority to establish what the suit calls “de facto public assistance agencies.” Hobbs issued executive orders designating the Arizona Department of Corrections, Rehabilitation, and Reentry (ADCRR) and the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) as voter information processing centers and ballot drop-off locations.

The suit claims that “Governor Hobbs unlawfully exercised her office by attempting to establish voting locations, drop-off locations for completed ballots, and make ADCRR and ADJC, as well as other state agencies, de facto public assistance agencies, which is outside her lawful authority.” They note, “The Arizona law is clear on who can distribute and accept voter registration forms and completed ballots: (1) public assistance or disabilities agencies as defined by statute; or (2) a location/agency as designated by a county recorder (or designee of a county recorder) or justice of the peace. The Governor is nowhere included in this clear line of authority. The same is true for determining voting locations.”

Political influencer George Behizy commented on X that Hobbs was attempting to “facilitate the steal” of the 2024 election in a move similar to one by Michigan’s Democrat Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

He addressed the main concern of the suit, stating, “Hobbs’s orders blatantly violate Article 1 Section 4 Clause 1 of the U.S. constitution which clearly states, ‘The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof[.]’ The constitutional delegates ALL election oversight to the state legislatures. It doesn’t grant the executive any power to delegate random government departments as vote registration sites or ballot drop-off locations.”

The U.S. Constitution clearly reserves that such rights “shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing(sic) Senators.”

The United States Supreme Court has yet to rule on the legality of such actions by Governors, as argued in 2020’s Texas v. Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan & Pennsylvania. That indeterminate ruling makes a potential AZ Supreme Court case momentously consequential, possibly serving as the basis for an ultimate federal ruling.