Arizona Kracken lawsuit

Case 2:20-cv-02321-DJH Document 1 Filed 12/02/20 Page 44 of 53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
right to vote on equal terms, the State may not, by later arbitrary and disparate
treatment, value one person’s vote over the value of another’s). Harper v. Va. Bd.
of Elections, 383 U.S. 663, 665 (1966) (“Once the franchise is granted to the
electorate, lines may not be drawn which are inconsistent with the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”). The Court has held that to ensure equal
protection, a problem inheres in the absence of specific standards to ensure its
equal application. Bush, 531 U.S. at 106 (“The formulation of uniform rules to
determine intent based on these recurring circumstances is practicable and, we
conclude, necessary.”).
114. The equal enforcement of election laws is necessary to preserve our
most basic and fundamental rights.
The requirement of equal protection is
particularly stringently enforced as to laws that affect the exercise of fundamental
rights, including the right to vote.
115. The disparate treatment of Arizona voters, in subjecting one class of voters
to greater burdens or scrutiny than another, violates Equal Protection guarantees because
“the right of suffrage can be denied by a debasement or dilution of the weight of a citizen’s
vote just as effectively as by wholly prohibiting the free exercise of the franchise.”
Reynolds, 377 U.S. at 555. Rice v. McAlister, 268 Ore. 125, 128, 519 P.2d 1263, 1265
(1975); Heitman v. Brown Grp., Inc., 638 S.W.2d 316, 319, 1982 Mo. App. LEXIS 3159,
at *4 (Mo. Ct. App. 1982); Prince v. Bear River Mut. Ins. Co., 2002 UT 68, 41, 56 P.3d
524, 536-37 (Utah 2002).
116. In statewide and federal elections conducted in the State of Arizona,
including without limitation the November 3, 2020 General Election, all
candidates, political parties, and voters, including without limitation Plaintiffs,
have an interest in having the election laws enforced fairly and uniformly.
117. Defendants failed to comply with the requirements of Arizona law and the
Equal Protection Clause and thereby diluted the lawful ballots of the Plaintiffs and of
other Arizona voters and electors in violation of the United States Constitution guarantee
- 44 -