Arizona lawmakers who opposed depositions on tougher voting laws fail to win Supreme Court stay
November 28, 2023, 10:44 am CST
- !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs'); Tweet
- lang: en_US
-
The U.S. Supreme Court has denied an emergency request for a stay by the speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives and the president of the Arizona Senate. Image from Shutterstock.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to block a federal judge’s decision to allow depositions of two Republican legislative leaders in Arizona who intervened to defend laws passed last year that require would-be voters to provide proof of citizenship.
The Supreme Court denied the emergency request for a stay by Ben Toma, the speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives, and Warren Petersen, the president of the Arizona Senate, report the New York Times and SCOTUSblog.
The laws ban those who don’t provide proof of citizenship from voting in most elections, including the U.S. presidential election, and from voting by mail in any election, according to a brief filed by two Democratic groups that challenged the law. The challengers claimed that the laws violate federal statutes and the U.S. Constitution.
Toma and Petersen denied that the legislature acted with a discriminatory intent.
Toma and Petersen had argued that they didn’t have to testify about intent and their involvement in the legislative process because of legislative privilege. Senior U.S. District Judge Susan R. Bolton of the District of Arizona had ruled that the privilege didn’t apply because the legislators had intervened in the underlying case to defend the law.
Among the groups challenging the law were the U.S. Department of Justice, the Arizona Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee.
The case is Toma v. U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Related topics: U.S. Supreme Court | States | Trials & Litigation | Judiciary | Election Law | Government | Legislation & Lobbying | Arizona | Civil Procedure | State Government | Deposition You might also like:- Lawyer reprimanded for feeding deposition answers to vulnerable client who had to be hospitalized afterward
- Columbia law prof banned from 2 depositions after allegations of verbal abuse, intimidating presence
- BigLaw firm's 'misrepresentations and passive obstreperousness' prevented witness testimony, judge says
- Lawyer sanctioned for being 'rude, demeaning and obnoxious' in depositions
- MyPillow CEO rails against lawyers in defamation depositions, says he doesn't make 'lumpy pillows'
Introducing Jobbguru: Your Gateway to Career Success
The ultimate job platform is designed to connect job seekers with their dream career opportunities. Whether you're a recent graduate, a seasoned professional, or someone seeking a career change, Jobbguru provides you with the tools and resources to navigate the job market with ease.
Take the next step in your career with Jobbguru:
Don't let the perfect job opportunity pass you by. Join Jobbguru today and unlock a world of career possibilities. Start your journey towards professional success and discover your dream job with Jobbguru.
Originally posted on: https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/arizona-lawmakers-who-opposed-depositions-on-tougher-voting-laws-fail-to-win-supreme-court-stay/?utm_source=feeds&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=site_rss_feeds