PHOENIX — A judge rebuffed Kari Lake’s bid to get access to ballot envelopes, saying that “would expose voters to harassment and potentially force them to defend the integrity of their own votes.”
In a sharply worded ruling released Thursday, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah acknowledged that, strictly speaking, the envelopes are public records.
But he said he also must consider whether disclosure might lead to “substantial and irreparable private or public harm.” He cited testimony by Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer that disclosure in this case “would create election integrity issues and depress voter participation.’’
Coupled with specific restrictions enacted by lawmakers on voter registration records, that trumps the request of Lake, the failed 2022 GOP gubernatorial candidate, Hannah ruled.
Nothing in the new order affects Lake’s ongoing efforts to get the state Court of Appeals to order a new election. But it denies the losing Republican contender access to the 1.3 million early ballot envelopes cast in the state’s largest county, undermining her ability to claim the county used improper procedures to verify signatures and allowed ballots with unmatched signatures to be counted.
Lake, in a post by her campaign on the social media platform X, blasted the decision.
“The judge ruled that while these records are public, the public has no right to see them,” the post said. “We can no longer trust or verify. Corrupt election officials are allowed to handle the people’s business in back rooms knowing the judiciary will not hold them accountable.’’
“Her goose failed”
Hannah had his own criticism of Lake and her efforts.
“The broad right of electoral participation outweighs the narrow interests of those who would continue to pick at the machinery of democracy,’’ the judge wrote.
He chided Lake for trying to get access to voter signatures — something he said most people regard as private — in her year-long effort to void her 17,117-vote loss to Democrat Katie Hobbs.
“Ms. Lake regards the electoral process much like villagers in the famous fable regarding the goose that laid the golden eggs, except that her goose failed to lay the egg she expected,’’ Hannah wrote of her loss.
Simply because she lost, he said, Lake insists something must have gone wrong.
“If only she could cut open the electoral process and examine each of its 1.3 million pieces, she says, she would be able to figure out what happened and show that the prize has been there waiting for her all along,’’ the judge said.
“And even if she doesn’t find what she’s looking for, she suggests, the act of disassembly will strengthen everyone’s confidence that the machinery produces reliable outcomes,’’ he continued. “We will know it lays the right eggs.’’
But lost in Lake’s efforts, Hannah said, is “the big picture of democratic self-governance.’’
Yes, he said, it’s about counting votes “to make sure as best we can that the right egg comes out.’’ He said though, there is more at stake here.
Would “turbocharge” bad behavior
He cited the testimony of two people who said individuals had come to their door after the 2020 election, the one former President Donald Trump contends he was cheated out of.
“They immediately began to pepper me with questions that they seemed to already have the answer to,’’ said Bonnie Eckard, such as whether certain people lived there, did they vote Democratic, did they vote by mail, did anyone else vote from that house, and whether they received extra ballots. Eckard said about the only answer she got when she asked who they were was “something about election integrity.’’
She said the questioners were “extremely aggressive with me,’’ at one point telling her “about dead people voting’’ and spouting “unproved conspiracy theories.’’
“Public disclosure of the ballot affidavit envelopes, most of which includes phone numbers that may be non-published or otherwise not readily available to the public, would facilitate this kind of offensive behavior at least, and turbocharge it at worst,’’ Hannah said. “That would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process.’’
Lake, in the post by her campaign, disagreed. “There is nothing on these envelopes that is not present on other government documents,’’ she said. Anyone can see signatures on deeds and other documents filed with the recorder’s office.
“They are being hidden,’’ Lake said of the envelopes.
But Hannah said that argument fails on two fronts.
“The mere perception of risk among potential voters like these, especially those who are elderly or otherwise vulnerable, would have serious adverse consequences,’’ the judge said.
“One of the witnesses said that she and her husband would hesitate to vote by mail if they thought their signatures might thereby become public records,’’ he wrote. “She expressed particular concern about the potential disenfranchisement of her elderly spouse, who cannot vote in person because of his poor health.’’
“Sensitive personal information”
Beyond that, Hannah said the law makes “voter registration records’’ off limits except for certain limited purposes.
“The Legislature obviously meant for (the law) to protect the privacy of voters’ sensitive personal information,’’ he said.
“Construing the statute to protect all election records containing a voter’s signature advances that legislative purpose,’’ he said. “Affording protection to voter registration and change-of-address cards but not ballot affidavit envelopes would manifestly defeat the statute’s purpose.’’
Lake had asked Hannah to note that Yavapai County Superior Court Judge John Napper, in a preliminary ruling earlier this year, said that ballot envelopes are not “voter registration records.’’ That would buttress her claim they are not confidential.
But he said Napper’s action has no bearing until there is an “authoritative final judgment’’ on what county reorders use as “voter registration records.’’
“Until then, the present case must be decided on the facts as they now exist, not on the hypothetical facts of the world the plaintiff would prefer.’’
Lake also blasted the judge for not allowing her to present her witnesses: Shelby Busch and Chris Handsel with We the People Arizona Alliance Political Action Committee, which has aligned itself with her campaign, and Eric Speckin, a forensic document analyst.
The judge said their testimony about the signatures was irrelevant to the question of whether the envelopes were a public record. And Hannah singled out Busch, saying she is “so obviously unqualified’’ to serve as an expert witness.
Get your morning recap of today's local news and read the full stories here: tucne.ws/morning
