But U.S. District Court Judge Steven Logan refused to order Fontes to immediately remove 1.2 million voters from the state's registration list, as requested by Citizen AG, which describes itself as a voter education group. The judge said that even if he had the right to change voter rolls – and he said he doesn't – the organization's contention is that many people on the list who shouldn't be allowed to do so are theirs Voting is “completely speculative at this point.”

Attorney Alexander Kolodin, who represents Citizen AG, said the verdict is still a victory.

He said once the documents are in hand – the judge gave Fontes until Dec. 2 to comply – it will give his client a chance to prove the veracity of his claims about poorly maintained voter rolls. And that, Kolodin said, could form the basis for a future challenge to the electoral rolls, even if that can only come after next week's election.

“We are pleased that the court has ordered the release of the records the secretary unlawfully withheld so that Citizen AG has the documents it needs to ensure Arizona’s voter rolls are cleaned up,” he told Capitol Media Services .

But Kolodin, a Republican state representative from Scottsdale, also dealt a political blow to Fontes, a Democrat.

“It is obviously difficult to prove an allegation when the secretary has only withheld documents that reveal the extent of his incompetence and misconduct,” he said.

A spokesman for Fontes declined to comment on the ruling but said the office would comply.

At the heart of the lawsuit is the claim that there are ineligible people on the list.

Karen Hartman-Tellez, an assistant attorney general representing Fontes, told the judge at Friday's hearing that there was no evidence to support the claim. Still, she acknowledged she can't say with certainty how many people may be registered to vote who either no longer live in Arizona or have died.

Whatever the answer is, it might depend on what's in those records.

Both state and federal law require election officials to send notices if there is evidence that a registered voter has moved. At that point, that person will be placed on the “inactive” list.

The person can reactivate by simply showing up at the polling station with proof of identity and address. However, if that person fails to vote in two consecutive elections, he or she will be completely removed from the electoral rolls.

Citizen AG claims that based on the data it has, there are 1.2 million Arizonans who were placed on the inactive list after the 2022 election but were not permanently removed. It was argued that this would dilute the votes of those legally entitled to vote.

Logan said the claim was based on “uncertain intervening events,” that ineligible voters were on the rolls, that they were given the opportunity to vote, that they voted and that nothing was done to prevent it.

“The court finds this assertion of possibility to be too speculative to establish concrete harm,” he wrote, which is necessary to bring the lawsuit in federal court.

And the judge had no plans to order Fontes to remove 1.2 million names from the list of inactive voters.

He said that claim was based on numbers in other reports the state submitted to the Federal Election Assistance Commission. But that, Logan said, isn't enough.

“Plaintiffs have no independent data to support the assertion that over 1.2 million inactive and ineligible voters remain on Arizona’s voter rolls,” the judge wrote. What they have at this point is “completely speculative.”

Either way, he pointed out that the NVRA itself prohibits the wholesale removal of individuals from voter rolls within 90 days of an election.

Which documents Citizen AG wants is another matter.

At Friday's hearing, Hartman-Tellez complained about the timing of all this. She told the judge that Citizen AG could have obtained the documents after the 2022 election, but did not file a public records request until Oct. 4 — and only went to court last Wednesday, less than a week before the election said he didn't have what the organization wanted.

That didn't impress Logan, who said there was a “clear legal right to inspect certain records.” Nor was he swayed by arguments that forcing Fontes to release these records would be too great a burden.

“This difficulty does not affect Citizen AG's right to obtain the records, regardless of whether it made such a request two years ago (on November 9, 2022, when plaintiffs claim the state of Arizona should have purged its voter rolls) or six years ago, days before the election,” he said. “The law is the law, even on the eve of an election.”

However, the judge agreed to give Fontes until December 2 to comply.