President Donald Trump issued an executive order this week stating that his administration will take steps to ensure election integrity, sparking objections from Democrats, including some Arizona officials. Secretary of State Adrian Fontes objected to the order, claiming it would “federalize elections,” with others making similar claims.
However, Democrats supported H.R. 1, a radical bill introduced in Congress in 2021 that would federalize elections. Then-Congressman Rodney Davis (R-IL-13), who served as a ranking member on the Committee on House Administration, said at the time that H.R. 1 would be “the largest expansion of the federal government’s role in our elections.” The Heritage Foundation published a lengthy analysis, summarizing, “H.R. 1 would federalize and micromanage the election process, imposing unnecessary, unwise, and unconstitutional mandates on the states.”
Trump’s order will require people to show documented proof of citizenship (DPOC) in order to register to vote instead of merely attesting to it. Other changes include prohibiting QR codes, requiring ballots to be received by Election Day, and regularly cleaning noncitizens from voter rolls.
Fontes told Votebeat that he was in talks with Attorney General Kris Mayes about whether they would sue the Trump administration.
On Thursday, Fontes discussed his views on the topic some more during the podcast of Marc Elias, the election fraud denying attorney who frequently files lawsuits and intervenes in election cases, including many in Arizona.
“It is sort of like this abject federalization of elections and the tone, the false accusations that are levied inside of this executive order with no evidence, again, the perpetuation of the big lie and all that sort of stuff,” Fontes said. “It’s part and parcel of the way authoritarians end up taking power. … This administration particularly is on a collision course with autocracy. You know, the rising fascism that appears out of this administration is horrifying.”
At the same time, Fontes praised having the federal Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) heavily involved in Arizona’s elections.
“They were critical to the security of our elections, and they’re one of the main reasons why we had great elections,” Fontes said. “We were able to draw down resources from the federal government to protect our infrastructure, our networks, our software, sort of our physical security systems that help keep us safe. And as those threats were ramped up because of the election denialism and Donald Trump’s lies, we needed that more and more. … Now, CISA can no longer talk to us because the Trump administration and Secretary Noem have said no.”
Arizona’s state bar disciplined Kari Lake’s former attorney, Bryan Blehm, for complaining about CISA’s role in the state’s elections. The House Judiciary Committee issued a report in June 2023, “The Weaponization of CISA: How a ‘Cybersecurity’ Agency Colluded With Big Tech and ‘Disinformation’ Partners to Censor Americans.” It went over how the agency coerced social media companies into taking down posts about elections from conservatives.
Fontes and Elias claimed that the president has no authority, citing the Constitution’s delegation of certain election powers to Congress and the states. Article 1, Section 4 states, “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.”
However, President Joe Biden issued a broad executive order regarding elections. In 2021, he issued “Promoting Access to Voting,” which sought to increase the number of registered voters. Republicans sued over its constitutionality, but a judge dismissed the lawsuit, stating they had no standing.
Former Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, an election fraud denier, claimed that the order violated the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). “E.O. requires documented proof of citizenship,” he posted on X. “Which directly contradicts the NVRA, which only requires attestation of citizenship.”
However, in a recent dissenting opinion regarding striking down Arizona’s law requiring documented proof of citizenship, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Patrick J. Bumatay said the laws shouldn’t have been struck down for violating NVRA “because the Constitution doesn’t grant Congress the power to regulate who may vote in presidential elections.” He noted that the Elections Clause in the Constitution “doesn’t govern presidential elections.” While it “may give Congress power over registration in congressional elections, it doesn’t extend that authority over presidential elections.”
He said the Electors Clause gives the states nearly all the authority over presidential elections.
“Congress merely has authority to choose the date of the presidential election and date of the electoral college vote,” the judge said.
The case is being appealed to the Supreme Court, which could agree with Bumatay and reverse the lower court.
Republicans in Congress have introduced a DPOC requirement bill called the SAVE Act.
– – –
Rachel Alexander is a reporter at The Arizona Sun Times and The Star News Network. Follow Rachel on Twitter / X. Email tips to rachel.r.alexander@gmail.com.
Photo “Voting” by Lorie Shaull. CC BY 2.0.
The post Arizona Left-Leaning Officials Who Supported H.R. 1 Denounce Trump’s Executive Order on Election Integrity as Attempt to ‘Federalize Elections’ first appeared on The Arizona Sun Times.