PHOENIX — Kari Lake supporters have a backup plan if a judge rejects her claim she’s entitled to view images of ballot envelopes and the voter signatures on them.
It turns on whether a second judge, handling a parallel demand, determines whether members of a group called We the People AZ Alliance qualify as news reporters.
That group of citizens registered as a political action committee has made its own request for the images.
As in the case of Lake, the county rejected it, saying state law makes those records confidential. Like Lake, the group has filed suit against County Recorder Stephen Richer.
Lake’s attorney, Bryan Blehm, also is the attorney for We the People. In fact, Blehm filed the cases within 35 minutes of each other.
But there’s a crucial difference between the two legal actions.
Although Lake is a former TV news anchor, she isn’t using the claim of reporters’ right to access that We the People is, as she challenges her loss in the 2022 election for governor.
We the People claims to be “a reportorial agency.’’ That’s important because the section of the state Election Code the county says makes the images off limits contains a specific exemption allowing their release “for news gathering purposes by a person engaged in newspaper, radio, television or reportorial work, or connected with or employed by a newspaper, radio or television station.’’
The county, for its part, isn’t buying it.
The county “denies that plaintiff is a reportorial organization’’ within the meaning of the law, said Deputy County Attorney Joseph La Rue in a legal filing.
Yet so confident was Blehm in his claim on behalf of We the People that he actually asked the Maricopa County judge in that case to issue a judgment in its favor even before she heard a shred of evidence.
Superior Court Judge Joan Sinclair also wasn’t buying it, however. She said in an order last week that the county raised “legally viable defenses’’ to its decision not to release the records. The question of whether We the People qualifies for an exception to the law making the records confidential requires more than her simply reading the pleadings, Sinclair said.
“We report relevant info to the public”
But, if nothing else, having that second case available gives Lake and her supporters a fallback position if Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah doesn’t accept her arguments the records are not confidential and can be released to anyone who requests them.
If it gets that far, it would send Sinclair down the path of having to decide whether We the People fits within the definition of “reportorial work.’’
The organization, in responding to questions online from Capitol Media Services, insists it does.
“We report relevant info to the public for transparency, education and information,’’ said a representative who handles the feeds for We the People on X, formerly Twitter.
Blehm does not explain in his legal filings why he contends We the People fits the definition of news reporting.
The organization describes itself on its website as “a citizen-driven movement designed to hold our elected accountable and bring government transparency to the people.’’
It also clearly has a viewpoint. “We have stood by and allowed out of control representatives in comfortable offices to slowly strip away what is rightfully ours,’’ the group’s site says. “We were sleeping.’’
It goes on to declare “no more!’’ and says “together we can take our country back!’’
PAC with Trump ally donations
There is at least one key difference between a traditional news outlet and We the People: The latter is registered with the Secretary of State’s Office as a political action committee. And since the 2020 election, it has reported more than $200,000 in donations, including $15,000 from Trump ally Mike Lindell, who has promoted claims denied by multiple judges around the country that the 2020 election was stolen.
The group’s report also says its cash on hand as of June 30, the most recent filing, was $63,442.
Asked whether that status undermines its “reportorial’’ claim, “I don’t believe it should or does but I guess the courts will ultimately decide that,’’ said the representative in the online response.
There clearly is a link between Lake and We the People.
Blehm sought to call Shelby Busch, the organization’s co-founder and president, as an “expert witness’’ in Lake’s case. And he said it was Lake’s intent, if she got the signatures, to turn them over to We the People for analysis.
In seeking to call Busch to testify in Lake’s case, Blehm argued her testimony was relevant because she had “a lot of work under her belt as someone who does investigations into elections.’’
“With the Ninjas?’’ asked Hannah, referring to the “audit’’ of the 2020 election ordered by then-Senate President Karen Fann. Blehm acknowledged that was the case.
Lake, in her ongoing challenge to the 2022 election results, has cited the work done by Busch and We the People in that audit. The group claimed tens of thousands of mismatched signatures on ballot envelopes it got to see, a conclusion disputed by Maricopa County.
Hannah was not impressed and refused to let Blehm put Busch on the stand.
“She’s so obviously a medical office manager,’’ the judge said. “She’s so obviously unqualified. She’s not even in the ballpark.’’
Busch also has a record as an activist.
She attended an election forum last month sponsored by Lindell. According to the Arizona Mirror, Busch told those in attendance that she and others “will take the Republican Party back.’’
What courts have said previously
The word “reporter,’’ as it relates to news gathering, is not defined in state law.
There is little case law in Arizona on who qualifies for that definition under various laws designed to provide certain privileges for news gatherers. These include the ability to refuse to divulge confidential sources and special protections against subpoenas.
A 1992 case involves the latter, dealing with an effort by then-state Sen. Carolyn Walker, indicted in the AzScam sting operation, to subpoena the notes of Dory Matera. He was an author working on a book about Joseph Stedino, the primary undercover agent in the sting in which lawmakers were promised bribes to vote for legalized gambling.
Matera challenged the subpoena, citing the state law that governs what has to be done to subpoena anyone “engaged in gathering, reporting, writing, editing, publishing or broadcasting news to the public.’’ He said the subpoena didn’t comply with the special requirements and should be quashed.
But the state Court of Appeals refused, saying that is applied only to members of the “news media’’ as commonly understood. That ruling, however, may not set any precedent should there be a legal fight about the status of We the People.
That’s because the appellate ruling, upheld without comment by the Arizona Supreme Court, turned on whether what Matera was doing fit the definition of news, which the judges described as “a report of recent events, material reported in a newspaper or new periodical or on a newscast, matter that is newsworthy.’’ And unlike someone writing a book, We the People could argue that it reports on “recent events’’ and events are “newsworthy.’’
More recently, there was a legal fight when Maricopa County decided that Jordan Conradson could not attend press conferences during the 2022 election cycle, saying space was limited and Conradson, who writes for The Gateway Pundit, was not an objective reporter.
After The Gateway Pundit sued, the case was settled out of court with Conradson allowed to attend press conference and the county paying $175,000 to the company.
Get your morning recap of today's local news and read the full stories here: tucne.ws/morning.
