In Win for Voters, Arizona Supreme Court Tosses GOP Challenge to State’s Election Manual

In a win for voters, the Arizona Supreme Court dismissed a Republican bid to throw out the state’s 2023 Election Procedure Manual (EPM), overturning an appeals court ruling that could have upended election administration in the Grand Canyon State.

The unanimous decision clears the way for Arizona to rely on the subsequently-updated EPM, which governs how elections are run in the state, in upcoming contests.

But the GOP lawsuit is still ongoing. The court sent eight other claims, which challenge specific provisions of the EPM, back to an appeals court for further consideration.

The Republican National Committee (RNC), along with state and local GOP groups, sued Arizona Sec. of State Adrian Fontes (D) shortly after he released a new version of the EPM in 2023, claiming it violated Arizona’s version of the Administrative Procedures Act. After a loss in trial court, the RNC won in Arizona’s Court of Appeals in March. But, sitting en banc, the state’s highest bench overturned that decision Thursday. 

“I am relieved and gratified by today’s decision,” Fontes said in a press release. “The rule of law has prevailed. The Court’s unanimous order confirms what every Secretary of State, Republican and Democrat alike, has always understood: the Legislature created a distinct process for adopting the Elections Procedures Manual, and that process stands apart from the Administrative Procedures Act.”

The RNC lawsuit sought to add several restrictive provisions to the EPM. It claimed that the manual violated state law by not requiring county recorders to research alternative government databases for a voter’s proof of citizenship, limiting public access to a registered voter’s signature, allowing voters to receive early voting ballots if they live out of state for specific elections, restricting the ability to challenge an mail-in early ballot before it is returned, and allowing for out-of-precinct voting. 

Fontes was forced to remove two of the pro-voting provisions included in the 2023 EPM after a federal district court order last year in a separate GOP lawsuit. Fontes’ office introduced a new version in August without those provisions, while it continues to appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Fontes’ office submitted its 2025 EPM draft to the Governor and Attorney General for approval earlier this year for finalization ahead of the 2026 election. According to a statement, the office conducted a public comment period, “although not required by statute,” because it “believes good governance demands transparency and public input—principles that are essential to maintaining trust in our elections.”

Fontes said the lawsuit was motivated by partisanship and the Arizona GOP ongoing election denialism. 

“For nearly a year, Arizona’s election professionals have been forced to divert time and taxpayer resources defending against an unnecessary, politically motivated lawsuit,” Fontes said. “This case was never about improving elections — it was about creating confusion and scoring political points at the expense of our democracy. I am proud that the Court has rejected that approach and restored stability and clarity to Arizona’s election administration.”

Maya Bodinson contributed to this report.

Intervenors in this case were represented by the Elias Law Group, whose chair, Marc Elias, is the founder of Democracy Docket.