By james art 
A federal judge late Friday ordered Secretary of State Adrian Fontes to turn over records he is required by law to have regarding his duty to maintain accurate voter rolls.
But U.S. District Court Judge Stephen Logan, originally appointed by then-President Barack Obama, refused to order Fontes to immediately remove 1.2 million voters from the registration rolls, as requested by Citizen AG, which calls itself a study group of voters. The judge said that even if he had that right to change the voter rolls — and he said he doesn’t — the organization’s contention that many people on the list who shouldn’t be allowed to vote are, at this point, ” completely speculative.”
Lawyer Alexander Kolodin, who represents Citizen AG, said the decision was still a victory.
He said once the records are produced — the judge gave Fontes until Dec. 2 to comply — it will give his client a chance to prove his claim of poorly maintained voter rolls. And that, Kolodin said, could provide the basis for a future challenge to the lists, even if that might not happen until after next week’s election.
“We are pleased that the court ordered the records that the secretary illegally withheld to be released so that the Citizen AG has the documents she needs to ensure that Arizona’s voter rolls are cleaned up,” he told the Capitol Media Services.
But Kolodin, a Republican state representative from Scottsdale, also took a political swipe at Fontes, a Democrat.
“Obviously, it’s difficult to prove a claim when the secretary has withheld only those records that reveal the depth of his incompetence and abuse,” he said.
A Fontes spokesman would not comment on the decision, but said the office would comply.
At the heart of the case is the claim that there are non-electable people on the lists.
Karen Hartman-Tellez, an assistant attorney general representing Fontes, told the judge at Friday’s hearing that there was no evidence to support the charge. Still, she acknowledged that she could not say for sure how many people who no longer live in Arizona or who have died may be registered to vote.
Whatever the answer, it could change what’s in those records.
Both state and federal laws require election officials to send notices when there is evidence that a registered voter has moved. At this point, that person is placed on the “inactive” list.
The person can be reactivated by showing up at the polling station with proof of identity and address. But if that person does not vote in two consecutive elections, he or she is removed from the electoral rolls entirely.
Citizen AG claims that based on the data it has, there are 1.2 million Arizonans who have been placed on the inactive list after the 2022 election but have not been permanently removed. He argued that failure to do so dilutes the voices of those who are legally entitled to vote.
Logan said that claim was based on “uncertain intervening events” that ineligible voters were on the rolls, that they were given an opportunity to vote, that they did vote, and that nothing would be done to prevent it.
“The court finds this allegation open to speculation to establish specific injury,” he wrote, something necessary to be able to file a lawsuit in federal court.
And the judge had no intention of ordering Fontes to remove 1.2 million names from the inactive voter list.
He said that claim is based on numbers in other reports the state provides to the federal Election Assistance Commission. But that, Logan said, is not enough.
“Plaintiffs have no independent data to support the contention that more than 1.2 million inactive and ineligible voters remain on Arizona’s voter rolls,” the judge wrote. What they have at this point is “purely speculative.”
Anyway, he pointed out that the NARP itself prohibits the mass removal of persons from the electoral rolls within 90 days after the elections.
The records Citizen AG wants, however, are another matter.
At Friday’s hearing, Hartman-Tellez complained about the timing of it all. She told the judge that Citizen AG could have sought the documents after the 2022 election, but didn’t file a public records request until Oct. 4 — and didn’t go to court until last Wednesday, less than a week before the election. after Fontes said he didn’t have what the organization wanted.
That didn’t impress Logan, who said he had a “clear statutory right to inspect certain records.” Nor was it swayed by arguments that it would be too great a burden to compel Fontes to produce them.
“This predicament is irrelevant to Citizen AG’s right to obtain the records, whether they made such a request two years ago (on November 9, 2022, when plaintiffs claim the state of Arizona should have purged its voter rolls) or six days before the election,” he said. “The law is the law, even before an election.”
However, the judge agreed to give Fontes until December 2 to comply.