Lawsuit seeking to decertify the election results in Arizona for the Presidential race.

Republican election contest seeking to block certification in Arizona.

Lawsuit filed by two Republican voters who claim they were unable to have their vote counted and seek to cast a new ballot.

Lawsuit filed by the Arizona Republican Party seeking to expand the state’s election audit.

After dismissing Arizona Public Interest Ballot Cure, the Trump campaign filed an identical lawsuit. This challenge is based on social media allegations that claim voters’ ballots did not count if they used a Sharpie, despite county officials strongly denying this claim.

Right-wing lawsuit regarding social media allegations claiming that voters were deprived of their voting rights because they used sharpies to fill out their ballots, despite the county officials strongly denying these claims.

Challenging Arizona law that required voter registration officials to reject any registration application that was not accompanied by documentary evidence of citizenship.

In 2016, the DNC, DSCC and others challenged two provisions of Arizona law: (1) a 2016 law that criminalized the practice of ballot collection, and (2) Arizona’s wholesale rejection of ballots cast in the wrong precinct. The Ninth Circuit held that the law was enacted with the intent to discriminate against minority voters, and struck down Arizona’s practice of entirely discarding ballots cast in the wrong precinct. The AG appealed the case to SCOTUS, who will hear the case in 2021.

Constitutional challenge to Arizona’s ballot order statute, which requires that candidates affiliated with the same political party as the gubernatorial candidate who won the most votes in a particular county are listed first on that county’s ballots. In practice, the statute has consistently favored Republicans, and in 2020 a full 82% of Arizonans will vote on ballots that list Republican candidates first for every partisan race. Expert analysis shows that first-listed candidates in Arizona received, on average, between a 2.2 and 4.4 percentage point average gain due to their ballot position. We contend that the statute unduly burdens the right to vote in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments and treats similarly situated candidates differently without sufficient justification, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

On behalf of the DNC, DSCC, and Arizona Democratic Party, we challenged Arizona’s failure to provide an opportunity to cure an otherwise valid mail ballot that doesn’t have a signature. The current version of Arizona’s Elections Procedures Manual treats mail in ballots differently: if a signature does not match, the voter has a cure period extending five days after the election, but if there is no signature the ballot will not be counted. We asked the state to give all vote by mail voters the same opportunity to cure a missing or mismatched signature.

Challenging Arizona over its mail ballot deadline law and practice that systematically disenfranchise voters in general and Hispanic and Latino voters in particular. Arizona requires ballots to be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day. The Election Day Receipt Deadline has particularly profound implications for Arizona’s Hispanic and Latino voters. In rural counties Hispanic and Latino voters are five to six times more likely to be disenfranchised than white voters. We settled with the state, who agreed to expand early voting and outreach efforts to these communities.