Sunday, August 16, 2026

You Go First

 Uh-huh.

Given the growth of election denialism and conspiracy theories since 2020, we are likely to see some officials attempt to use refusal to certify to delay the conclusion of the 2026 election if they disagree with the results. Refusing to certify accomplishes two things for election conspiracists, even if refusal is ultimately unsuccessful. First, it amplifies election conspiracy theories and further undermines public confidence in our election system. Second, it can lead to delays in the post-election process, particularly if state officials and candidates aren’t prepared to respond quickly.

That’s why those who refuse to certify or attempt to delay should be met with an immediate response. Accountability not only increases the likelihood of the current results at issue being certified in a timely manner, it also works as a deterrent to help prevent future threats to certification.

State officials and courts should step in when certification is threatened. It’s important to note that the requirement to certify by the legal deadline generally applies even when there are questions about the conduct of the election or the validity of certain ballots — state law provides mechanisms for candidates, officials, or voters to challenge the election’s administration or results.

Because it’s a ministerial duty, election certification can be compelled by a court, which is a way to ensure these disputes are resolved quickly. Attempts to halt the certification of an election are therefore highly likely to fail, and may result in some sort of civil or criminal penalty for those who obstruct the process.
And all Biggs would do is threaten the representation of the people of Arizona in Congress. Real popular position to take.  It doesn’t really mean anything for the country. It would mean a lot to Arizona.

No comments:

Post a Comment