Attorney General’s Office Receives Outpouring of Support in Ballot Harvesting Supreme Court Case

Amicus briefs filed in support of Brnovich


WASHINGTON, D.C. – Attorney General Mark Brnovich announced today that his office has received an outpouring of support from national and local leaders in Brnovich v. DNC and his defense of Arizona’s authority to enact laws that prevent voter fraud and safeguard election integrity.


In late April of this year, Attorney General Brnovich asked the Supreme Court of the United States to rule on Arizona’s laws restricting ballot harvesting and out-of-precinct voting after the Ninth Circuit struck down the common sense election integrity measures. In February 2020, AG Brnovich obtained a stay of the Ninth Circuit’s decision, leaving Arizona’s laws in place for the time being. With similar laws enacted in several other states, the Attorney General’s Office argues this case presents an opportunity to establish a clear rule of law for the country, and the Supreme Court can and should bring clarity to these important matters that are vital to our elections.

“Arizona, like every other state, must exercise the responsibility and authority to protect the integrity of the ballot box,” said Attorney General Mark Brnovich. “The legal challenge filed by outside groups seeking to undo Arizona’s common sense election statutes has broad implications for the entire country. States need a clear rule of law from the Supreme Court so they may continue to ensure fair and equal voting for all .”

Fourteen amicus briefs were filed in support of the State’s position by the following groups and individuals, including:

From the State Secretaries of State brief led by Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams:

“Only this Court can resolve this conflict. The lower courts have had ample opportunity to weigh the text, history, and precedents of the Voting Rights Act, and they have reached two incompatible conclusions.  Election laws that are legal in one state might be deemed illegal in others. As a result, election officials like the amici Secretaries lack the certainty needed to ensure that States administer fair, open, and lawful elections. This Court should grant certiorari to provide that certainty for these kinds of claims.”

From the Attorneys General brief led by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost:

“Despite these efforts to make voting as easy as possible, the States face a steady barrage of lawsuits in which plaintiffs “ask the federal courts to become entangled, as overseers and micromanagers, in the minutiae of state election processes.”

From the State legislator brief led by the Missouri House Speaker Elijah Haahr:

“State legislators need the Court’s guidance concerning the scope of vote denial claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The Court has never addressed the standard for vote denial claims under Section 2, and a split between the circuits has now emerged.”