What Was the Point of That Cochise County Stunt?

By Jim Geraghty

Friday, December 02, 2022

 

Now that those two Republican members of the Cochise County Board of Supervisors have voted to certify their county election results, we’re left with the question: What was the point of all of that?

 

It appears to have been a demonstration that county supervisors Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd did not understand or ignored the powers, duties, and responsibilities of their offices. We’ve never had local officials refusing to perform their duties not out of an objection to their own county’s elections, but out of an objection to another county’s handling of its election. Just what did those two Republican supervisors think was going to happen? In the face of their refusal to certify Cochise County results, Katie Hobbs would concede the governor’s race and Kari Lake would be sworn in instead? Current governor Doug Ducey would declare the election results null and void and declare another election would be held? A majority of Arizonans would be so inspired by this act of defiance and rejection of duties under the law, that they would march on the state capitol and overthrow the state government?

 

The Cochise County government’s lawyer told the supervisors that what they were doing was violating state law, every step of the way. They ignored him. Now, former prosecutors are arguing that the two supervisors must face criminal prosecutions, or else Arizonans will see more of this nonsense in future elections:

 

“​​Failing to hold Supervisors Crosby and Judd accountable for their violations of law could embolden other public officials to abandon their legal duties in future elections,” the letter says. “Accordingly, we respectfully urge that your offices use your authority to investigate and, if the evidence warrants, to prosecute Supervisors Crosby and Judd for any violations of law. The preservation of free and fair elections in our state depends on it.”

 

There’s also a civil lawsuit filed against the county, contending that the supervisors disenfranchised their constituents. That will be tougher to prove now that they’ve relented, but the lawyer bringing the case contends that the case could serve as a useful warning to other local lawmakers: “We’re hoping that our type of litigation would have a deterrent effect for county supervisors of any level of government in Arizona who feel they have any sort of right to violate state law and disenfranchise voters.”

 

What was the point of this stunt? It didn’t change any election results, embarrassed the county, and may well cost the county’s taxpayers more in legal fees.

 

There is a distinct subset of the Republican Party — and population at large, honestly — that mistakes anger for righteousness, gut feelings for empirical evidence, strongly held beliefs as verifiable facts, and a position in government with a platform for venting whatever pops into their head to the general public. They believe adherence to the law is a series of optional suggestions, not requirements.