398 F.Supp.3d 529
D. Ariz.2019Background
- Sen. John McCain died Aug 25, 2018, creating a Senate vacancy for a term ending Jan 3, 2023; Governor Ducey appointed Jon Kyl, who resigned Dec 31, 2018, and then appointed Martha McSally.
- Arizona A.R.S. §16-222 authorizes gubernatorial temporary appointments and schedules the special election to coincide with the next general election (here, Nov 3, 2020), producing an appointed period of ~27 months from the vacancy.
- Plaintiffs (registered Arizona voters of various parties) sued under 42 U.S.C. §1983 seeking declaratory and injunctive relief: (1) Seventeenth Amendment right-to-vote claim, (2) Elections Clause/Seventeenth Amendment claim re: appointment power, and (3) challenge to §16-222’s “same political party” requirement (Elections, Qualifications, First Amendment).
- Plaintiffs sought an order requiring a special election within about one year; defendants moved to dismiss and opposed injunctive relief. The court considered the pleadings and oral argument and took judicial notice of public facts.
- The court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss: Counts I and II dismissed for failure to state a claim; Count III dismissed for lack of Article III standing. Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary and permanent injunction was denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §16-222’s timing (27-month appointment) violates the Seventeenth Amendment/right to vote | Delay >1 year is presumptively unconstitutional; voters have a right to an election within ~1 year | State may set vacancy procedures; aligning with next general election furthers turnout, cost, and clarity | Court: statute constitutional; delay reasonable; no Seventeenth Amendment temporal limit; Count I dismissed |
| Whether statute "compels" rather than "empowers" the governor to appoint, violating Seventeenth Amendment | §16-222 unconstitutionally compels appointment instead of empowering governor to choose special election without appointment | Legislature may prescribe procedures including mandatory appointment; Seventeenth Amendment leaves this to state law | Court: no basis to read such a limitation into the Amendment; Count II dismissed |
| Whether the "same political party" requirement violates Elections/Qualifications/First Amendment and whether plaintiffs have standing | Requirement imposes partisan qualification and state endorsement harm | Only governor is directly constrained; plaintiffs lack particularized, redressable injury | Court: plaintiffs failed to make a clear showing of injury and redressability; lack Article III standing; Count III dismissed |
| Whether preliminary injunction is warranted | Immediate injunctive relief ordering an earlier special election is necessary to vindicate voting rights | Plaintiffs unlikely to succeed on merits; irreparable harm not shown; public interest and equities favor state | Court: injunction denied—movants failed Winter factors; mandatory injunction particularly disfavored |
Key Cases Cited
- Valenti v. Rockefeller, 292 F. Supp. 851 (S.D.N.Y. 1968) (upholding a lengthy interim appointment and recognizing substantial state interests in aligning vacancy elections with regular elections)
- Rodriguez v. Popular Democratic Party, 457 U.S. 1 (1982) (approved use of interim gubernatorial appointment pending next regular congressional election)
- Judge v. Quinn, 612 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2010) (refused to read a Seventeenth Amendment limit requiring governor discretion to call special election in lieu of appointment)
- Burdick v. Takushi, 504 U.S. 428 (1992) (adopted balancing test for evaluating burdens on voting rights)
- Anderson v. Celebrezze, 460 U.S. 780 (1983) (balancing test weighing character/magnitude of burden against state interests)
- Twombly v. Bell Atl. Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading standard requires plausible claim to relief)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading must permit reasonable inference of liability)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires injury in fact, traceability, redressability)
- Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 555 U.S. 7 (2008) (elements required for preliminary injunction)