The lawyers who fought to get alleged sham candidate Olivia Cortes disqualified in the Mesa recall election planned to put Senate President Russell Pearce’s brother on the stand in a now-cancelled trial.

Arizona Senate President Russell Pearce and his opponent in a recall election met in their first debate Thursday, sparring over illegal immigration and its financial impact on education and businesses.

The Arizona Supreme Court today refused to stop a lower court from hearing new witnesses in the lawsuit that’s seeking to disqualify recall candidate Olivia Cortes.

It’s not because the lawsuit was politically motivated. Everyone knows how unapologetically brutal politics can be. And it’s not because the lawsuit was brought to defame Ms. Cortes, either. Placing your name on a ballot is the functional equivalent of sending the world an open invitation to attack your character.

A judge ruled today that the Mesa woman accused of being a “diversionary” candidate in the recall election targeting Senate President Russell Pearce was clearly recruited by Pearce’s supporters but that he cannot kick her off the ballot.

Republican Olivia Cortes’ admission in court yesterday that she doesn’t own the pro-Cortes campaign signs in Mesa and nobody knows who paid for them compelled the city to take them down.

The operative assumption of most observers of the Russell Pearce recall election has been that Pearce is the odds-on favorite to retain his seat. He hails from a heavily Mormon, conservative, Republican district and has, after all, regularly won elections handily.

Capitol consultants and insiders are marveling at how quiet the Pearce and Lewis campaigns have been when it comes to releasing polling results.

In his first campaign video, Mesa Republican Jerry Lewis sharpened his political position over how his approach to illegal immigration would differ from Senate President Russell Pearce’s.

The Arizona Supreme Court today quashed a challenge to the recall election targeting Senate President Russell Pearce, affirming a trial court’s earlier decision that the recall petitions are valid.