An Order of the 56th Legislature of the State of Arizona
Declaring the state legislatures plenary authority over the manner of the Presidential election
Whereas the state legislatures plenary authority over the Presidential election is granted in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 of the United State Constitution, not Article 1, Section 4; and the plenary authority granted to the state legislatures states “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”
Whereas In 1892, SCOTUS in McPherson v Blacker confirmed the absolute power of legislatures to appoint electors directly despite custom of popular vote spreading to all states.
Whereas SCOTUS said the power was never questioned, "Even in the heated controversy of 1876-1877 the electoral vote of Colorado cast by electors chosen by the legislature passed unchallenged...”;
Whereas each SUCCESSIVE state legislature has EXCLUSIVE power to appoint POTUS Electors or change the manner of the POTUS election at any time.
Whereas a new State legislature is independent of the previous legislature. The previous legislature does NOT bind the current legislature from changing the manner of the POTUS election; and McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 35 (1892), that the state legislature's power to select the MANNER for electors is plenary; it may, if it so chooses, select the electors itself, which indeed was the manner used by state legislatures in several States for many years after the framing of our Constitution. Id., at 28-33.
Whereas history has now favored the voter, and in each of the several States the citizens themselves vote for Presidential electors; and The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Ar appointing ticle II, can take back the power to appoint electors. See id., at 35 ("'[T]here is no doubt of the right of the legislature to resume the power at any time, for it can neither be taken away nor abdicated'") (quoting S. Rep. No. 395, 43d Cong., 1st Sess.).” The State has the plenary authority to change the manner of the POTUS election at any time.
Whereas CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST, with whom JUSTICE SCALIA and JUSTICE THOMAS join, concurring, in Bush v Gore (2000) stating, “(114) In any election but a Presidential election, the Florida Supreme Court can give as little or as much deference to Florida's executives as it chooses, so far as Article II is concerned, and this Court will have no cause to question the court's actions. But, with respect to a Presidential election, the court must be both mindful of the legislature's role under Article II in choosing the manner of appointing electors and deferential to those bodies expressly empowered by the legislature to carry out its constitutional mandate.”
Whereas Washington v Chiafolo 2020 (8-0 Unanimous Decision), states “The Constitution is barebones about electors. Article II includes only the instruction to each State to appoint, in whatever way it likes, as many electors as it has Senators and Representatives (except that the State may not appoint members of the Federal Government).” Once again, showing the plenary authority the state legislature has over the manner of the POTUS election; and
Whereas Washington v Chiafolo, also states “(a) Article II, §1 gives the States the authority to appoint electors 'in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.' This Court has described that clause as 'conveying the broadest power of determination' over who becomes an elector. McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U. S. 1, 27.” Again, reinforcing the states legislatures authority over POTUS election is plenary; and
Whereas the last 2 elections have been riddled with controversy and lawsuits with rules, form, and procedures of the election broken which has led to a low public confidence in how elections are run.
Whereas public distrust in our elections has been steadily declining and no significant change in election integrity has been implemented since 2020 to protect the People’s POTUS vote in 2024; and the only way to protect the People’s 2024 POTUS vote is to control the manner of its election.
Whereas SCOTUS has repeatedly agreed that the state legislature has the plenary authority to change the manner of the POTUS election if it so chooses.
Whereas Moore v Harper (2023) decision provides another Supreme Court precedent for the state legislature to change the manner of the POTUS election.
Whereas there is nothing in the Arizona Constitution that conflicts with the US Constitution to prohibit or constrain the Arizona State Legislature from using its Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2 authority to change the manner of the POTUS election for 2024.
Whereas according to Moore v Harper the state legislature has the “exclusive” right to define the method.
Whereas McPherson v Blacker, Bush v Gore, Chiafolo v Washington, and Moore v Harper all support the authority to change the manner of the 2024 POTUS election; now, therefore, be it
Be it resolved, that the Arizona state legislature declares its plenary authority over the manner of the POTUS election granted to them in the United States Constitution under Article 2, Section 1, Clause 2; and;
Resolved, that legislative district 2 urges the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring to appoint the 11 Arizona 2024 POTUS electors to the Republican Primary winner on day one of the 2024 legislative session; and;
Resolved, that legislative district 2 urges the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring that the 2024 POTUS electors will remain appointed and rescinded only if the Governor signs an election integrity bill including the following:
1. That NO voting machines will be used in any election.
2. That All voting will take place in person, on Election Day.
3. That All voting will take place in the People’s designated Legislative District Precincts.
4. That All votes will be hand counted when the Polls close on Election Day, in the Precinct they were voted in, by a Democrat and Republican counting in pairs.
5. That ballots will NOT leave the precinct until there is a full count and tally of all the votes before being transported by an Officer, Democrat, and Republican to a central location to be determined.
6. That all ballots will be printed out, after ID is shown to the poll worker, to ensure the voter is in the proper Precinct to cast their vote.
7. That there will be no mail in ballots for any election.
8. That there will be no drop boxes.
9. That all absentee ballots will be notarized to ensure the person signing is the actual person confirmed by the Notary.
10. That all votes shall be canvassed, and the returns made within twenty-four hours after the polls are closed.
11. That all votes will be tallied at a central location to be determined. The individual precinct will deliver their lawfully sealed box(es) with a form for each individual box, properly attached, for easy identification. This form will include the Precinct number, the number of votes for each candidate, printed name and signatures of all counters involved, printed name and signature of all couriers, date and time of beginning and end of counting, date and time of when the ballots left the Precinct to when they arrived at the designated central location, and the printed name and signature of the Officer that transported them with representatives from each Party to the central location.
12. That the ERIC system is abolished in Arizona.
13. That voter rolls are annually cleaned.