Republican state Rep. John Gillette is accusing Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Attorney General Kris Mayes of applying a double standard to voter privacy by resisting federal demands for voter information while Arizona shares registration and motor-vehicle records with a multistate nonprofit organization.
Gillette, who represents Legislative District 30, raised the allegation Friday, citing records related to Arizona’s participation in the Electronic Registration Information Center, commonly known as ERIC.
“Fontes and Mayes pound the table about ‘voter privacy’ and ‘federal overreach’ when DOJ and USPS ask for Arizona’s voter rolls,” Gillette wrote. “I bring the receipts of Hobbs, Fontes and Mayes’ lies and hypocrisy.”
@CivilRights@realAlexKolodin @FBIPhoenix
SEVERE ANGER ALERT!!! WARNING TO ALL AZ VOTERS.Fontes and Mayes pound the table about “voter privacy” and “federal overreach” when DOJ and USPS ask for Arizona’s voter rolls.
Fontes “I am protecting voter data”.
Mayes “Over my… https://t.co/HUk8aDkymm pic.twitter.com/wf8rbCBvmS
— Rep. John Gillette AZ House LD30 (@AzRepGillette) September 18, 2026
Arizona is among the jurisdictions participating in ERIC, a Delaware-incorporated 501(c)(3) organization governed and funded by its member states. The organization compares voter-registration and motor-vehicle records across participating states to identify voters who may have moved, died, maintained duplicate registrations, or potentially voted illegally.
Under ERIC’s published procedures, member states submit voter-registration records and motor-vehicle licensing and identification data at least once every 60 days.
The organization’s security documentation says the records include names, addresses, current registration status and, when available, telephone numbers and email addresses. The matching process also uses driver’s license or state-identification numbers, partial Social Security numbers and dates of birth. ERIC says those sensitive fields are converted through a cryptographic one-way hash before the files are transmitted.
According to ERIC, the hashing process converts the information into non-readable character strings that can be compared with similarly processed records without transmitting the original numbers in readable form. The DOJ request sought unredacted information.
Gillette argued that Arizona’s participation conflicts with Fontes’ and Mayes’ repeated warnings about providing voter information to the federal government.
“Fontes warns that federal access could expose addresses, birth dates, Social Security information and driver-license information, the very same data the DOJ requested,” Gillette wrote.
The Department of Justice sued Fontes after his office refused to provide Arizona’s complete, unredacted statewide voter-registration database. The federal government said it wanted the records to evaluate Arizona’s compliance with federal voter-list maintenance laws.
U.S. District Judge Susan Brnovich dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice in April, finding that Title III of the Civil Rights Act did not authorize the Justice Department to demand the statewide database.
Mayes and Fontes celebrated the ruling in a joint statement, saying the database contains “the sensitive personal information of millions of Arizona voters — home addresses, dates of birth, and Social Security and driver’s license numbers.”
“Arizona acted correctly in refusing this request, and today’s ruling vindicates that decision,” the two Democratic officials said. “Our offices will continue to defend the privacy of Arizona voters against federal overreach.”
A separate U.S. Postal Service rule challenged by Mayes and Fontes would have required election officials to upload basic information about each mail-ballot recipient to a federal portal and use a specialized barcode assigned to that voter. The rule did not call for dates of birth, Social Security numbers, or driver’s license numbers.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined this month to allow the Postal Service to implement the rule before the November election. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote separately that applying the requirements so close to the election would be arbitrary and capricious because election officials lacked sufficient time to implement them.
Gillette also questioned whether Fontes possesses independent statutory authority to transmit voter records to ERIC.
Arizona law directs the secretary of state to develop, administer, and maintain the statewide voter-registration database while county recorders retain responsibility for individual voter records and registration cancellations.
A separate statute requires the secretary of state to conduct several database comparisons. A.R.S. § 16-165 directs the secretary’s office to compare Arizona’s statewide voter database with state driver’s license records and report possible address changes or noncitizenship findings to the appropriate county recorder. County recorders make the resulting determinations and carry out any registration cancellations required by law.
Neither statute specifically names ERIC.
Gillette further criticized ERIC’s treatment of citizenship information, writing that the organization “doesn’t search for non-citizens.”
ERIC’s own published explanation says member states must remove known noncitizens from their motor-vehicle data before submitting it. ERIC does not independently connect its records to a federal citizenship database. The organization uses the submitted state records to identify people who appear eligible but unregistered, along with outdated or potentially duplicate voter registrations.
Gillette also alleged that ERIC was allowed “into our elections IT network.” ERIC says its servers are never connected to any state voter-registration system and that states retain control of their voter rolls. Member states transmit prepared data files to ERIC and receive reports identifying records that may require review.
Arizona’s participation in ERIC and the organization’s general data-sharing requirements are publicly listed on ERIC’s website. Gillette said the specific extent of the information Arizona provides has not been adequately disclosed to voters.
“Voters are entitled to ask why Arizona has long participated in an ERIC system,” Gillette wrote. “Why the lies and double standard.”
Gillette called for further examination of the state’s legal authority to participate and its distinction between providing voter data to ERIC and refusing federal demands.
“What are they hiding?” he asked.
Be the first to comment