The Supreme Court recently denied an emergency appeal from Ben Toma, the speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives and Warren Petersen, the president of the Arizona Senate, who requested for an order that would require them to be deposed about the legislature’s approval of certain voting laws to be held back. The legislative leaders had joined the lawsuit to defend the laws when Attorney General Kris Mayes did not fully do so, following which the plaintiffs sought discovery from them, which meant questioning them on the legislature’s intent in passing the laws. The court rejected their argument that an order requiring them to appear for a deposition would violate the legislative privilege, and they subsequently sought relief from the Supreme Court.
The laws under debate were passed in 2022, which necessitate that potential voters provide proof of U.S. citizenship or face consequences such as a majority voting ban or a complete restriction on mail-in voting. These laws have been contested by the Biden administration, the Democratic National Committee and the Arizona Democratic Party, among others, who contented in federal court that these laws infringe upon the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection and Federal voting laws.(SCOTUSblog)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit and the district court both upheld the idea that Toma and Petersen had waived their privilege when they decided to join the case and agreed that the depositions could advance. The Democratic National Committee and the Arizona Democratic Party have urged the justices to deny the request, highlighting that the discovery requests do not seek personal intentions of the legislators, instead, they seek to understand the legislature’s intent.(Supreme Court)
Toma and Petersen are not out of options though, according to the Democrats. For instance, they can choose not to comply with the discovery order and then appeal any sanctions or contempt order that may follow.