Title: Former Arizona Gubernatorial Candidate Kari Lake Pushes for Release of Voter Signatures in Public Records Case
Subtitle: Lake’s Lawsuit Aims to Challenge 2022 Election Result Amidst Unproven Claims of Fraud
Date: [Insert Date]
Author: Stacey Barchenger
Former Arizona gubernatorial candidate, Kari Lake, is advocating for the release of signed ballot return envelopes from Maricopa County voters, arguing that they should be considered public records. The issue came to light during the first day of a trial where Lake’s lawyer, Bryan Blehm, presented the case for reviewing the envelopes that contain voters’ signatures.
At the core of the trial is a public records dispute, with Lake seeking access to the envelopes and signatures as part of her ongoing efforts to challenge the results of the 2022 election. Lake has made unproven claims of fraud and misconduct, blaming them for her loss against Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs. However, data indicates that it was Republican voters crossing party lines that contributed to Hobbs’ victory.
Representing County Recorder Stephen Richer, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office contends that the signatures are specifically protected from disclosure under a separate provision of state law. They argue that releasing the signatures could potentially disenfranchise voters due to privacy concerns and fears of harassment in today’s highly polarized climate.
During his opening statement, Blehm highlighted the prevalence of signatures in various public documents, emphasizing their role as a form of identification. He argued that signatures have long been deposited into the stream of commerce and routinely end up on the county recorder’s website with millions of other signatures dating back decades.
Richer, who testified during the trial, drew a distinction between signatures on official documents like land records and those on ballot affidavit envelopes. He stressed the constitutional significance of protecting the right to vote, suggesting that it outweighs the public’s right to access signatures found on other documents.
Lake’s lawyer submitted a public records request in March, seeking access to the signatures for her election result lawsuit. However, the recorder’s office denied the request, citing a provision that restricts access to certain voter registration records, including signatures.
Richer expressed concerns about setting a precedent that could make signatures publicly accessible to anyone, asserting that it could complicate running future elections. He emphasized that during the 2022 election, approximately 16,000 ballots needed to be cured due to missing or mismatched signatures, and making signatures available to Lake could potentially deter people from signing or create privacy concerns.
In addition to the public records issue, evidence was presented during the trial to illustrate the heightened hostility and polarization surrounding elections. Testimonies from a voter and progressive lobbyists shed light on the harassment individuals have experienced in relation to voting rights and LGBTQ+ advocacy.
Superior Court Judge John Hannah, presiding over the trial, focused on addressing the public records aspect and kept the proceedings on track. He ruled against calling witnesses who were linked to the widely discredited Arizona Senate’s 2020 ballot review, maintaining that their testimonies were irrelevant and could spread falsehoods.
The trial is set to continue with the county calling witnesses to testify about the election atmosphere on the second day. Lake has not yet presented any witnesses.
As the case unfolds, it remains to be seen whether Lake’s efforts to gain access to the voter signatures will succeed, further challenging the legitimacy of the 2022 election result.