Hoffman v. Reagan, 110118 AZSC, CV-18-0187-AP/EL
|Opinion Judge:||BALES CHIEF JUSTICE.|
|Party Name:||Louis Hoffman, a Qualified Elector; and Amy Chan, a Qualified Elector, Plaintiffs/Appellants, v. Michele Reagan, in Her Official Capacity as Arizona Secretary of State; State of Arizona, Defendants/Appellees, and Steve Yarbrough, in His Official Capacity as President of the Arizona Senate; J.D. Mesnard, in His Official Capacity as Speaker of...|
|Attorney:||Daniel J. Adelman, Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, Phoenix, Attorneys for Louis Hoffman and Amy Chan. Mark Brnovich, Arizona Attorney General, Rusty D. Crandell, Assistant Solicitor General, Robert J. Makar, Assistant Attorney General, Phoenix, Attorneys for State of Arizona and Se...|
|Judge Panel:||CHIEF JUSTICE BALES authored the opinion of the Court, in which VICE CHIEF JUSTICE BRUTINEL and JUSTICES PELANDER, TIMMER, BOLICK, GOULD, and LOPEZ joined.|
|Case Date:||November 01, 2018|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Arizona|
Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County The Honorable Teresa A. Sanders, Judge No. CV2018-007353
Daniel J. Adelman, Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest, Phoenix, Attorneys for Louis Hoffman and Amy Chan.
Mark Brnovich, Arizona Attorney General, Rusty D. Crandell, Assistant Solicitor General, Robert J. Makar, Assistant Attorney General, Phoenix, Attorneys for State of Arizona and Secretary of State Michele Reagan.
Michael T. Liburdi, Daniel B. Seiden, Willis M. Wagner, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Phoenix; Jeffrey J. Kros, Office of the President, Arizona State Senate, Phoenix; Joshua A. Kredit, Office of the Speaker, Arizona House of Representatives, Attorneys for Steve Yarbrough and J.D. Mesnard.
CHIEF JUSTICE BALES authored the opinion of the Court, in which VICE CHIEF JUSTICE BRUTINEL and JUSTICES PELANDER, TIMMER, BOLICK, GOULD, and LOPEZ joined.
BALES CHIEF JUSTICE.
¶1 House Concurrent Resolution 2007 ("HCR 2007") is a legislatively referred referendum that, if approved by the voters, will amend Arizona's Clean Election Act in two respects. In a decision order, we ruled that HCR 2007 does not violate the "single subject rule" - our constitutional requirement that "[e]very act shall embrace but one subject and matter properly connected therewith… which subject shall be embraced in the title…." Ariz. Const. art. 4, part 2, § 13. This opinion further explains our ruling.
¶2 In 1998, the people of Arizona approved the Citizens Clean Election Act, A.R.S. §§ 16-940 to -961 ("CCEA"), to "create a clean elections system that will improve the integrity of Arizona state government." A.R.S. § 16-940. The CCEA created the Citizens Clean Elections Commission (the "Commission"), which is charged with voter education and enforcement of the Act. A.R.S. §§ 16-955 to -957. The Commission comprises five members, no more than two of whom may be from the same political party. A.R.S. § 16-955(A). Members are appointed for five-year staggered terms, with appointment authority alternating between the governor and the highest-ranking official holding a statewide office who is not a member of the governor's party. A.R.S. § 16-955(D).
¶3 Seeking to amend two aspects of the CCEA, the legislature approved HCR 2007 pursuant to its authority...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP