Hernandez Ballot Challenge Fails as Perez Vows Appeal

State Representative Alma Hernandez (D-20) will remain on the ballot in the Democratic primary for Arizona’s Legislative District 20 Senate seat after a court rejected a legal challenge seeking to disqualify her candidacy. The challenge, filed by opponent Rocque Perez, argued that more than $20,000 in alleged unpaid campaign finance penalties should bar Hernandez from appearing on the ballot under Arizona law.

On social media, Hernandez said, “the Arizona campaign finance system is outdated and needs to be fixed. hat’s why I’m committed to working with our Secretary of State to ensure he has the resources he needs to improve this broken system.”

Hernandez’s legal team countered that the penalties did not meet the statutory definition of a disqualifying liability because no formal, enforceable order had been issued. The court agreed, allowing her candidacy to proceed. Arizona courts have consistently drawn a clear line on this issue. Candidates are only disqualified when penalties are formally imposed and legally enforceable, not simply alleged or outstanding. That precedent presents a steep uphill climb for any appeal.

Following the ruling, Hernandez issued a statement to the Arizona Globe, sharply criticizing her opponent’s challenge.

“Just as expected, the court rejected this baseless attempt to remove me from the race. I’m grateful to my attorney, Daniel Arellano, and the entire Herrera Arellano LLP team, who stood strong against this political stunt. Let’s be honest: this was never about a real case. It was a desperate move by an opponent who knows he can’t win on the merits, so he tried to game the system instead. It’s the same tired playbook: distract, deflect, and rig the field. It didn’t work. I’m not going anywhere. In fact, I’m doubling down. While others waste time and public resources on political games, I’ll keep doing what I’ve done for the past 8 years, delivering for my district and fighting for my constituents. The voters will decide. Election Day is 95 days away, and I’m ready to earn every vote and hand this unserious opponent another loss.”

Hernandez also stated that her opponent is appealing the decision to the Arizona Supreme Court. Based on existing case law, including prior rulings in which courts declined to disqualify candidates for unenforced penalties, such an appeal faces long odds. Arizona courts have repeatedly required clear, enforceable liability before removing a candidate from the ballot, a threshold the trial court found was not met in this case.

The lawsuit was filed at the statutory deadline for election challenges and named state and county election officials, arguing they should not have accepted Hernandez’s nomination paperwork. With the trial court rejecting that argument, the case now shifts to a potential appellate review. However, absent a significant departure from established precedent, the ruling is likely to stand. For now, Hernandez remains on the ballot, and the race moves forward to where it ultimately belongs—with voters