The Arizona Supreme Court ruled late July 20 that Rep. Russ Jones will remain on the ballot.
The order reversed the lower court ruling and stated that the court erred in ruling that Mr. Jones committed petition forgery.
The past month has been a rollercoaster for Mr. Jones, R-24, who is seeking to replace retiring Democrat Bob Cannell as senator for the district. On July 5, he survived a challenge to his nominating petition signatures. Within days, the judge agreed to a motion filed by Democratic Party attorneys to reopen the lawsuit. On July 12, Mr. Jones was off the ballot and barred from seeking public office for five years, after the judge ruled he was guilty of forgery. Two days later, the Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments in Mr. Jones’ appeal, and both sides have since filed a pair of briefs stating their cases.
“The most important thing at this point is to clear my name,” the would-be Senate candidate told Arizona Capitol Time just hours before the latest ruling allowing him back on the ballot.
Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Kenneth Fields ruled that Mr. Jones was not acting as the petition circulator on three days he claimed to be, even though he signed the petitions as the circulator and invalidated the signatures. He said Mr. Jones’ committed petition forgery by doing so. The Supreme Court disagreed.
In his appeal to the Supreme Court, Mr. Jones argued the lower court had no grounds to reopen the lawsuit, and the petition forgery ruling was contrary to the law and the evidence. He contended the judge ignored testimony that he was in Yuma on one of the dates in question, and no evidence was presented proving he wasn’t in Yuma on another day. For the third day, he argued that he was present in the room, though he did not gather all of the signatures himself.
However, Paul Eckstein, a lawyer for the state Democrat Party, argued in his response that Mr. Jones testified in court July 11 that he was not in Yuma either day.
“The record is clearly to the contrary and Jones’ attempt to obfuscate the evidence is disingenuous and unavailing,” he wrote.
Another of Mr. Jones’ arguments is that the petition forgery allegation doesn’t apply because he did not forge anyone else’s signature, nor did he have any intent to defraud. Mr. Eckstein, though, says Mr. Jones’ actions are the equivalent to someone signing their own name on a check and claiming to be a trustee of the account, despite not being such.
Mr. Eckstein also filed a cross-appeal, asking the Supreme Court to determine whether an additional 14 signatures should be invalidated because Mr. Jones did not list the date of the primary election on the petition, which could lead to voter confusion.
Mr. Jones said there was no specific date on the petition, but it did denote the election as occurring in 2006. Since, he argued, there is only one primary election date for statewide elections, putting only the year substantially complies with the statutory requirement to put a date on the petition and alleviates any possible confusion.
Repercussions
Though she has disavowed any knowledge of the signature challenge and ensuing legal action, Democrat Rep. Amanda Aguirre — Mr. Jones’ only challenger for the Senate seat — has been criticized.
Mr. Jones says she is at the least complicit in the challenge for not asking the party to halt it. He says petition challenges, while common in Maricopa County politics, are rare in rural Arizona and are viewed by many voters as underhanded.
“I think the real loser in this case is Yuma County voters,” he said.
Ms. Aguirre has also come under fire from Mr. Cannell, who was expected to co-chair her election committee. Mr. Cannell has announced he will no longer do so, citing the representative’s tacit approval of the petition challenge.
“To get him off the ballot this way is kind of dinky, I think,” he said. “I don’t want my name on a campaign that’s run that way.”
Ms. Aguirre was not available for comment.
Mr. Cannell, who has announced he will change his registration to Republican when his legislative term concludes at the end of the year, says Yuma voters are so upset with Ms. Aguirre, he thinks they will lash out against her at the polls.
“I don’t think Amanda will be senator,” he said.
He also was critical of the state Democratic Party that organized the challenge. Such tactics, Mr. Cannell said, smack of big-city politics to rural voters.
“I think, long-term wise, if the Democrats don’t change their ways, they’re going to lose all their rural seats,” he said. “It’s gonna hurt ’em and I want it to hurt ’em. They need to learn, ‘Don’t do this here!’”