SUPREME COU RT OE ARIZONA

CHRISTOPHER PEREA, AN ) Arizona SuPreme Court

individual; and THOMAS JENNEY/ ) No. CV-18-0035-AP/EL
an individual, )

) Maricopa CountY
Petitione rs /APPe I lant s, ) Superior Court
) No. CYZALI -0LL931
V. )

) ErLED 03/21/2OLA
MICHELE REAGAN, in her )

capacity as the SecretarY of )

State of Arizona, )

ResPondent /APPe1 lee , )

and )

SAVE OUR SCHOOLS ARIZONA, A )

political committee, )

Real PartY in lnterest/APPe1lee ' )

DECISION ORDER

The court, consisting of Chief Justice Bales, Vice chief Justice

Brutine},JusLicePelander,JusticeTimmer,JusticeGould,and
JusLice Lopez, affirms the trial court's order filed January 31'
2AlB, dismissing t.he Complaint on the following grounds:
Tn2aL5LheArizonaLegislatureenactedaprovisionthat
narrowed the available cause of action for procedural challenges
to

iniriative and referendum petitions. 2015 AxLz. Legis' Serv' ch' 285

(H.B.2401},amendingA.R.S.s7g-L22(C)(2015).In2a7.7,the
pre-
Legislature enacted another bill that would expand the available
election procedural challenges to allow " lal ny person" to contest
certain actir:ns by the secretary of state concerning initiative or
Arizona Supreme Court Case No. CV-18-0036-AP/EL
Paoe I CT C

referendum petitions. 2OL1 Artz' Legis' Serv' Ch' 52 (H.B. 2444) ,

amending A.R.S. s Lg-722(C) GA71). The 20:-'7 amendment to A.R.S. S

Lg-722(C) was effective on August 9, 2471'

Under A. R. S . S L9-7L'7, "any change in the law or Procedure
adopted by a governing body with respect to circulation or filing of

all referendum Petition after a[] . referendum Petition

application is filed does not apply." In ArizorLat pre-election

challenges atl concern compliance with the details of circulation or
filing of petitions contained in the statutes that prescribe the
timing, form, and contents of ci-rculated petitions and the validity
of signatures and petition sheets candidates and proponent's file with
election officials. Tifson v. Mafford, 153 Ar:'z' 468
see, €.9.,
(i9B?) (holcing court can hear only defects in petition process and
form prior to election, and 'tform" includes the title of

constitutional amenCment proposed)'

The referendum petition at issue in t.his matter was filed on

August B, 2AL1. The Arizcna Legislature passed, the Governor signed,

and on the law's August g | 2O]r'7 effective date the State adopted the
amended A.R.s. s ig-L22lc) now in force. under the facLs of this
case, therefore, when the referendum petition was filed on August 8,
ZAL"I, the law and the procedures under it remained as enacted in
2A75, and A,R.S. s 19-11? precluded applying to the petition fited on

August B the change in the law that was adopted on August 9'
Arizona Supreme Court Case No. CV-18-0036-AP/EL
Page 3 of 4
The Under Advisement RuIing of the superior court is
affirmed.
Justice Bolick did not participate in consideration of this
*^!!^v
lltd i, LU r .

DATED this 2lst daY of March, 2AlB.

SCOTT BALES
Chief Justice
Arizona Supreme Court Case No. CV-18-0035-AP/EL
Page 4 of 4

TO:
Timothy A LaSota
Kory A Langhofer
Thomas J Basile
Kara Karlson
Joseph Eugene La Rue
Roopali H Desai
Andrew S Gordon
D Andrew Gaona
Viduta Uday Patki
Hon. Margaret R MahoneY
Christine KellY