At least one appeals court judge appears poised to allow full manual counting of early votes in Cochise County.
However, those who voted at the polling place were not included.
And if the draft opinion is valid after the three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal hears the arguments on Tuesday, it says that without evidence, the counting machines cannot be trusted and can be tallied only by hand counting. It will be a partial victory for the Republicans who have been claiming it. Accurate results.
In addition, it would pave the way for election officials in 14 other counties in the state to implement expanded manual counting of all early votes.
They accounted for the most ballots cast in the 2024 election, accounting for more than 80% of the governor’s total of 2.56 million votes cast. And it can slow down the results.
The draft ruling moves Cochise County after the labor group, the League of Arizona Retired Americans, announced plans to hand-count all ballots in addition to machine ballots before the November election. It is the latest in a legal battle that has been sued.
A trial judge blocked the move. But the county has appealed for permission to make such counts in the future, even after the election is over.
At the center of the legal battle are two sections of state law that provide for the audit of election results.
One deals specifically with those who are cast on Election Day. This includes comparing hand count results with those reported by the tallyers from at least 2% of the race districts selected.
If it is within the specified error, then the problem is over. Otherwise, a larger sample is selected for review.
Any discrepancies in this will result in an even larger sample. And only if it falls outside the specified margin, the county can do a full manual count of all ballots on Election Day, but only for the campaign in question.
Lawyers for Republican superintendent and county registrar David Stevens called for a full tally before the November election, arguing that 2% was the floor above which measures could be decided.
The draft opinion reads, “We disagree.”
“If (the law) is reviewed in its entirety, full personnel audits will only be permitted after a multi-step process involving conducting less extensive audits,” the report said. “Interpreting (the law) to allow counties to begin with a full headcount audit would make the legislative multi-step process unnecessary.”
If the decision is adopted by a three-judge panel after Tuesday’s hearing, it would be consistent with Pima County Superior Court Judge Casey McGinley’s ruling just before the November election.
But the draft opinion also concluded that Mr. McGinley was wrong in interpreting another provision of the law dealing with early voting, prohibiting the county from conducting a full manual count of the approximately 30,000 early voters. ing.
The law requires counties to count 1% of all early votes or 5,000 early votes, whichever is less. However, it also states that the county “may choose to audit more ballots at its discretion.”
And similar language is found in the enforceable Election Procedure Manual prepared by the Secretary of State.
“We will interpret the language (of the law) to represent minimum rather than maximum requirements for auditing early voting,” the draft opinion states. “As a result, counties have the discretionary power to conduct audits of all early voting in the first phase.”
The move to tally the number of hands follows wild and unsubstantiated claims, mostly by Republicans, that the voting equipment used in 2020 (the one lost by Donald Trump) was vulnerable to hacking. This is the result. There have even been allegations of links between the Dominion voting system and the family of the late Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.
Most recently, Republicans Kari Lake and Mark Finchem filed lawsuits seeking a ban, arguing that machine counting is inherently unreliable before losing the 2022 gubernatorial and secretary of state races, respectively. rice field. The bid was rejected by a federal judge and is currently on appeal.
The same pattern emerged in Cochise County.
Two Republicans on the Cochise board, Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd, wanted to expand the number of hands.
Crosby argued that a full hand count would “increase voter confidence” and could be completed before the deadline for certifying election results.
They were endorsed by Stevens, who is also a Republican.
The move was opposed by Ann English, the only Democratic Party overseer.
But it wasn’t strictly a partisan war.
A vote of 2 to 1 for a full handcount was held, despite Republican Attorney Brian McIntyre’s recommendation to the contrary.
“Please don’t try to order this individual handcount,” he said to the board, warning that the practice was illegal and could expose supervisors to personal liability.
It was also opposed by county elections official Lisa Mara, who testified at the first trial that it could delay results and jeopardize ballot security.
Mr. Mara eventually resigned, saying he was effectively pressured by Republican supervisors to participate in the counting process for the 2022 election. She filed a complaint about her toxic work environment and was ultimately awarded a $130,000 settlement.
The draft opinion also dismisses the argument that the appeals court should not even consider McGinley’s pre-election judgment now that the campaign is over. Rather, it concludes that the ruling is appropriate given that the situation may recur.
–
