Arizona’s top legislative leaders have filed a court brief supporting Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap in his legal dispute with the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors over who controls key election functions. Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro submitted an amicus brief in Maricopa County Superior Court, urging Judge Scott Blaney to side with Heap. The case, Heap v. Galvin, centers on the interpretation of Title 16 of Arizona law, which governs election duties.

According to the brief, when election statutes assign a responsibility to “the county recorder or other officer in charge of elections,” the duty rests with the Recorder unless he explicitly chooses to delegate it. Likewise, when the statutes name the Board of Supervisors first, the Board carries the responsibility unless it delegates. “The Legislature’s distribution of statutory duties throughout Title 16 reflects a careful and deliberate diffusion of power and authority over elections at the county level,” the filing states.

The filing emphasizes that both the Recorder and the Board are constitutionally created, elected county offices whose powers are defined by statute. Petersen and Montenegro argue that the Board cannot unilaterally assume duties assigned to the Recorder without undermining legislative intent. They cite the legal principle against “surplusage,” which discourages interpretations that render words in statutes meaningless, and the doctrine of constitutional avoidance, which favors interpretations that prevent conflicts over separation of powers.

The brief also addresses disputes over control of staff, funding, and equipment. The lawmakers argue that the Board cannot remove personnel or resources necessary for the Recorder to carry out statutory duties. Citing past Arizona cases, they say such actions would unlawfully strip an elected officer of responsibilities given directly by law.

The outcome of the case could have implications for election administration across Arizona’s 15 counties. A ruling in Heap’s favor would reinforce the independence of county recorders in managing elections, while a decision favoring the Board could consolidate greater oversight authority under supervisors. Petersen and Montenegro said they filed the brief to clarify legislative intent. “Neither the boards of supervisors nor the recorders have inherent authority,” the filing states, “so when a statute authorizes the ‘county recorder or other officer in charge of elections’ to act, the statute should be understood to impose that duty on the recorder unless the recorder chooses to delegate that duty.”

Heap issued a press release declaring that he was not backing down.