The Arizona Supreme Court will decide on July 7 whether petition signatures are valid if the signer only lists a Post Office box, not a physical residence address. The case is Jenkins v Hale, cv 08-0208-AP-EL. The issue must be decided in time for the September 2 primary, so it is being rushed. The Court will decide based on the written briefs (the last of which is being submitted this morning). There will be no oral argument. The case arose because the petitions of three Democratic candidates for the legislature in the northeastern corner of Arizona were challenged. The lower court ruled in favor of the validity of the signatures. The three candidates whose ballot position is at stake are Senator Albert Hale, and House candidates Albert Tom and Chris Descheeny. UPDATE: The Arizona Supreme Court upheld the lower court decision, so that candidates Albert Hale and Chris Descheeny will be on the September 2 primary ballot. The Court said it will explain its reasoning later. Candidate Albert Tom, who is an incumbant, will not be on the primary ballot. Even counting signatures with post office boxes instead of physical addresses, he needed 522 valid signatures and only had 495 valid.
If a P.O. Box is listed on a person’s voter registration form as a secondary address, I see no reason why it can’t count for being a valid address as a part of a petition signature.
How many folks reside inside a P.O. Box ??? — taking note that in rural areas there may NOT be official residence / street addresses.
If they had outlawed PO Boxes, what about “General Delivery,” which is not a physical address either? This would eliminate about half of the registered voters in some rural Kentucky counties, and probably some in rural Arizona as well. A P.O. Box for some people is just a non-generic general delivery.