On Friday, August 23, 2024, the Arizona Supreme Court found that the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AFEC) can continue its challenge of nearly 40,000 duplicate signatures supporting Prop 140. If allowed, the proposition would allow a ballot measure to institute a “California-style jungle primary,” whereby all party members face one another. Such primaries deprive political parties of forwarding their best candidates and, in some cases, allow two or more candidates of the same party to run for one position in the general election. It’s one of the reasons that in some areas of California, only Democrats run for office.

Since AFEC had not yet completed the challenge, and ballot printing began on August 23, 2024, the Court declined to strike the ballot measure. But it added that if the signature challenge is ultimately successful, it would issue an injunction to prohibit counting any votes for the proposition.

Scot Mussi, President of the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, expressed appreciation for the Court. He said, “I am grateful for this thoughtful decision from the Arizona Supreme Court. At no time did the trial court judge or the committee in favor of the initiative provide evidence as to why these signatures were not duplicates but instead relied on a strategy of obstruction to run out the clock. The lateness of this challenge did not have to be the case if the lower Court had only adhered to the Supreme Court’s earlier directive for all duplicates to be removed from the qualifying count. For any ballot measure – but especially one that would fundamentally transform our elections systems – Arizonans deserve complete confidence that our courts are applying all laws fairly and justly.”

The Court ruling stated, “There is no statutory directive that a court resolve an election challenge like this one before the ballot printing deadline. Regardless, this Court, and indeed the trial court, has consistently endeavored to resolve initiative challenges before the ballot printing deadline… But the courts’ role is to dispense justice. Courts cannot be forced to rule rashly to meet a ballot printing deadline or provide the parties with certainty.”

At issue are approximately 40,000 duplicate signatures originally included when the Prop 140 Committee submitted to the Secretary of State. Two hundred fifty individuals had signed the petition five or more times, and one had signed 15 times. They were all included by the Arizona Secretary of State Fontes.

“This isn’t a debate about dubious matches or concerns of same family members with the same name being confused as a duplicate,” Mussi added. “All the duplicates submitted to be removed were exact name and address matches that aligned with what was on the voter file. Under state law, you are only allowed to sign a petition once, so they should have been removed. Instead, thousands of people were allowed to sign the initiative petition sheets multiple times, and those signatures were counted.”

You can read the original Court order here.