>> Ted: COMING UP NEXT ON ARIZONA HORIZON, IT'S THE JOURNALIST'S ROUNDTABLE.

A LOOK AT THE WEEK'S TOP STORIES INCLUDING THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT TAKING A LOOK AT THE STATE'S ABORTION LAW.

THE JOURNALIST'S ROUNDTABLE IS NEXT ON ARIZONA HORIZON.

>> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO ARIZONA HORIZON.

I'M TED SIMONS.

IT'S FRIDAY AND THAT MEANS IT'S TIME FOR THE JOURNALIST'S ROUNDTABLE AND WE HAVE JEREMY DUDU, HOWIE FISCHER AND MARK BRODIE.

GENTLEMEN, LET'S GET IT STARTED.

JEREMY, SUPREME COURT BASICALLY SAYS, WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THIS BUSINESS OF THE TERRITORIAL ERROR LAW.

>> SURE.

THE ABORTION ISSUE LAST YEAR WHEN ROE V. WADE WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT, THIS PUT A COUPLE OF ARIZONA LAWS IN FLUX AS WE HAD THIS PRE-STATEHOOD BAN AND THE 15-WEEK BAN SIGNED LAST YEAR BY GOVERNOR DUCEY.

THE COURT OF APPEALS, I BELIEVE, A DECEMBER RULE THAT THE PRE-STATEHOOD BAN WAS UNENFORCEABLE THAT COULD NOT BE USED TO PROSECUTE DOCTORS.

THE LEGISLATURE APPEALED OTHER STUFF.

THE LAW WAS NOT REPEALED AND SAID OTHER LAWS THAT SUPERCREED THISSUPERCEDETHIS AND THERE THEY WILL DETERMINE WHICH ONE IS CONTROLLING.

FOR NOW, WOMEN CAN GET ABORTIONS THROUGH 15 WEEKS.

>> THAT'S THE PROBLEM IS THAT WHAT GOT IGNORED BY THE COURT OF APPEALS, WHATEVER YOU FEEL ABOUT IT, THE 15-WEEK BAN WAS PUT IN JUST IN CASE THE U.S. PREAK ONLY SUPREME COURT UPHELD THE MISSISSIPPI BAN.

IT SAID IN THE BAN, WE ARE NOT REPEALING THE TERRITORIAL ERROR LAW, NO ABORTIONS EXCEPT TO SAVE THE LIFE OF A MOTHER.

I THINK THE COURT OF APPEALS SQUINTED AT THAT AND HECK, EVEN DOUG DUCEY SQUINTED AT THAT.

HE SAID A LAW PASSED LAST YEAR, AND IT SUPERCEDES THE LAW BACK IN TERRITORY AREA DAYS.

THIS IS CLOSE CALL AND WHAT'S ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.

>> Ted: MARK, THAT WAS ALWAYS IN A QUESTION THAT THIS DOES NOT SUPERCEDE THAT OLD LAW AND NOW THE MINUTE ROE V. WADE IS OVERTURNED, IT DOES.

>> THAT WAS IN THE LAW THAT GOVERNOR DUECY DUCEY SIGNED.

WHAT THE SUPREME SAID AND I THINK, INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT KIND OF IMPACT, IF ANY, ALL HALF HAS ON, AS HOWIE POINTED OUT TO COLLECT SIGNATURES TO PUT AN AMENDMENT ON THE BALLOT NEXT YEAR.

>> Ted: I WANT TO GET TO THAT IN A SECOND.

>> A LOT OF PRO-LIFE CONSERVATIVES AND LOOKING TO THIS AND THINKING, HEY, WE GOT MOST OF WHAT WE WANTED AND IF YOU WATCHED THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE EARLIER THIS WEEK, YOU KNOW, YOU SAW A LOT OF TALK.

MIKE PENCE, TALKING ABOUT THE 15-WEEK BAN, THAT SHOULD BE NATIONAL AND ADDING NIKKI HALEY SAYING OH, THESE NINE JUSTICES MADE THIS DECISION.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM WHO IS VERY ANTIABORTION RIGHTS AND PRO-LIFE GROUP PURSUING THIS APPEAL.

YOU KNOW WHAT THEY WANT HERE AND IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF YOU SEE A LOT OF OTHER REPUBLICANS AND OTHER CONSERVATIVES RALLYING TO THAT CAUSE, GIVEN THE POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS THAT WE'LL SEE NEXT YEAR.

>> Ted: HOWIE, THE LEGAL IMPLICATIONS, AT WHAT POINT DO YOU SAY A LAW SUPERCEDES A PREVIOUS LAW, MAYBE, MAYBE NOT AND HOW MANY OL LAWS COULD BE REVIVED BECAUSE OF THIS EQUATION?

>> IN GENERAL, AND I'VE BEEN COVERING THIS PLACE SINCE '28 AND BACK IF LAWMAKERS WILL REPEAL A LAW, THEY WILL TAKE THE SECTION OUT AND SAY ARS 13 AND THIS IS REPEALED.

OR THEY WILL PUT IN ANOTHER LAW THAT CLEARLY SUPERCEDES BUT WHEN YOU SAY IN YOUR LAW NEW WE'RE KEEPING THE ODD ONE, IT CLEAR.

IT WAS A PIECE OF PURPOSEFUL DRAFTING TO SAY THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SUPREME COURT WILL DO.

REMEMBER, THIS 15-WEEK BAN WAS PASSED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT OVERTURNED ROE V. WADE.

THEY WANTED THEIR CAKE AND EAT IT, TOO.

>> Ted: THE GOVERNOR TALKED ABOUT UNCONSCIONABLE ATTACK ON LIBERTIES, MARK, AND WE HAVE OUR ORDER THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, WHO IS VERY MUCH PRO ABORTION RIGHTS, THEY'RE BASICALLY -- I MEAN, THE SCHEMATIC HERE -- >> THERE'S A LOT GOING ON.

>> Ted: YES, THERE IS.

>> WHAT WE DON'T NOVEMBER KNOW -- I HAVE NOT HEARD OF A COUNTY ATTORNEY SAYING I'M DYING TO PROSECUTE A DOCTOR FOR PERFORMING AN ABORTION.

IF A CASE IS LAWSUIT TO US, THEY SAY THEY WILL LOOK AT IT AND MAKE A DETERMINATION.

YES, THAT'S A GOOD POINT, THAT'S STILL OUT THERE AND THAT COULD BE CHALLENGED AS WELL.

>> Ted: HOW DOES THAT SPECIAL ORDER, THE GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER, HOW DOES THAT PLAY INTO ALL OF THIS?

>> AS MARK WAS SAYING, IF A COUNTY ATTORNEY DECIDES TO CHALLENGE THIS BECAUSE THIS LAW HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED IN COURT AND ONLY BEEN USED TO TAKE AWAY -- USED GUBERNATORIAL POWER, GIVE IT TO THE AG ONCE IN THE 1976.

AND EVEN THE GOVERNOR WHO DID THAT DECADES LATER DIDN'T BELIEVE BRUCE BABBOT'S INTERPRETATION OF WHAT THAT DID AND SIGNED IT AND THE SUPREME COURT DECLINED TO HEAR THE CASE.

THE EXTENT OF THE GOVERNOR'S POWER HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED AND INTERESTING TO SEE IF SOMEONE DECIDES TO GO TO COURT ON THAT.

>> Ted: THE REAL KEY WILL BE THE NOVEMBER >> IT'S IT IS WHO WILL GET ELECTED AND ANTIABORTION FOLKS AND PEOPLE ARE DIVIDED IN TERMS OF WHERE THE LINE IS.

IS IT VIABILITY AND 15 WEEKS, THE HEARTBEAT, WHERE IS THAT?

BUT IF YOU, IN FACT, HAVE THE SUPREME COURT SAYING ABORTIONS FROM THE POINT OF CONCEPTION ARE ILLEGAL IN THIS STATE WHICH WOULD OUTLAW OTHER FORMS OF CONTRACEPTION, I THINK PEOPLE ARE MORE WILLING TO GO TO THE POLLS AS MUCH AS THEY MAY NOT LIKE THE LAW BEING PROPOSED, THEY MAY BE WILLING SAY, I WOULD RATHER HAVE THIS THEN SENDING MY DAUGHTERS, SISTERS AND WIFES IN A POSITION THAT THEY CAN'T GET THE MEDICAL CARE THEY NEED.

>> Ted: MARK, LET'S GET BACK TO THE INITIATIVE DRIVE AND PUTTING ABORTION RIGHTS THERE.

IT'S A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

DOES THIS KICK-START THAT EFFORT?

>> I THINK THEY'RE PROBABLY TRYING TO GET STARTED ANYWAY.

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE THAT THE MORE THIS IS IN THE NEW CYCLE, THAT MIGHT UP DOE DONATIONS.

WE HEARD FROM THE FOLKS ON BALLOT, 40 OR $50 MILLION TO COLLECT THE SIGNATURES AND THEN RUN THE CAMPAIGN THAT THEY WANT TO GET VOTERS TO APPROVE IT.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMED THERE WOULD BE PLENTY OF MONEY IN THIS CAMPAIGN ALREADY AND THIS CASE MIGHT JUST HAD TO IT.

>> IF IT GETS ON THE BALLOT, JEREMY, HOW DOES THAT CHANGE THE DYNAMIC?

>> THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT SAID ABORTIONS ARE OUTLAID IN STATE, THAT IS SUCH A TURN-OUT DRIVE AND A VOTE FOR THE YES SIDE.

FOR THE 15-WEEK BAN, A LOT OF FOLKS WANT TO SEE SOME ABORTION RIGHTS AND DON'T WANT TO SEE AS FAR AS THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO GO AND YOU HAVE 15 15 WEEKS AND THAT'S REASONABLE TO GO WITH THAT.

BUT THE INITIATIVE THAT PUTS ABORTION RIGHTS IN THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION AND NO ABORTION RIGHTS AT ALL, IT'S CLEAR WHICH WAY THEY'LL GO.

WE'VE SEEN STATE AFTER STATE AND EVEN FAIRLY CONSERVATIVE STATES THAT PEOPLE COME OUT TO VOTE FOR ABORTION RIGHTS.

WE HAVE OHIO, KANSAS AND WE'LL SEE IT AGAIN IN ARIZONA IF THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS.

>> IF THIS COMES OUT WHEN THE LEGISLATURE IS IN SESSION AND THE COURT SAYS ABORTIONS ARE ILLEGAL, HOW MANY REPUBLICANS, ABORTIONS FOLKS WILL SAY WE DON'T WANT TO RISK THIS AND WHAT ARE THEY WILLING TO PUT FORTH AS A COMPROMISE TO SAY TO PEOPLE, LOOK, YOU DON'T HAVE THIS ALL OR NOTHING, HIRE IS THE MIDDLE HERE IS THE MIDDLE GROUND?

>> Ted: LET SAY THE SUPREME COURT DOES GO DOWN THAT AVENUE, DO YOU THINK THE REPUBLICAN-LEAD LEGISLATURE WILL GO IN THAT DIRECTION?

>> I THINK THERE WILL BE AMOUNT OF PRESSURE ON MANY REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS, AS MUCH AS THEY SAY.

I'VE TALKED TO SEVERAL WHO SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT I BELIEVE AND I KNOW THAT ABORTION IS WRONG.

I SAID, OK.

POLITICAL REALITY, YOU MAY BELIEVE THAT, BUT THE POLITICAL REALITY AS JEREMY SAID IS IF IT COMES DOWN TO NO ABORTIONS FROM THE POINT OF CONCEPTION TO THIS CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AS LIBERAL AS SOME SAY IT IS, SOME WILL TAKE THAT AMENDMENT.

>> IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF WE GO DOWN THAT ROAD, WHAT WILL GOVERNOR HOBBS DO?

COULD SHE SAY WELL, IF WHAT YOU'RE OFFERING ME IS NOT AS GOOD AS WHAT'S ON THE BALLOT AND SHE MIGHT SAY NO TO THAT AND BANK ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT GOING AND BEING ON THE BALLOT AND TAKING PRECEDENCE.

>> THERE'S A FAIRLY EASY OUT ON THIS IF SOME REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS ARE WILLING TO TAKE THIS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO UP THE 15 WEEKS TO 22 WEEKS OR 24.

YOU HAVE TO REPEAL THE OLD LAW, THE 15-WEEK BAN SAID IT WASN'T REPEALING.

IS THERE ENOUGH -- WILL THE MAJORITIES OF THE REPUBLICAN CAUCUSES IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE DO THAT?

WILL THEY WILLING TO PUT THAT UP FOR A VOTE IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE MAJORITY OF AT EACH OF THEIR CAUCUSES?

>> THERE'S ANOTHER THING THAT GOES BACK IN TERMS OF THE GOVERNOR'S EDICT, WHICH YOU GET TO SIDE WHAT GETS PROSECUTED.

IF YOU BELIEVE THAT AND KRIS MAYES KEEPS HER 232 LEAD, THERE WILL BE NO PROSECUTIONS IN ARIZONA NO MATTER WHAT THE COURT SAID.

>> Ted: IT'S 280, RIGHT?

YES.

>> ABETHIS IS JUST ANOTHER OF THE SUPREME COURT SAYING, THERE'S A WAY TO DO THIS AND THIS IS NOT IT.

>> THE OTHER PIECE OF IT WHICH IS CRUCIAL IS THAT WHEN HIS ATTORNEYS WENT TO THE SUPREME COURT, THEY SAID WE HAVE ASK JUDGE JAN SECOND ENSEN FOR A FINAL ORDER AND THAT'S WHY IT'S COMING TO YOU.

IT TURNS OUT THEY HADN'T ASKED THE JUDGE AND NOTHING ANNOYS A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE THAN BEING LIED TO.

>> Ted: THAT'S WHERE SANCTIONS COMES IN.

>> AGAIN AND AGAIN AND EVERY WEEK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER LAWYER IN ONE OF THESE AND OBVIOUSLY KRIS MAYE AND AND THEY NEED TO GET THEIR MONEY BACK.

>> Ted: AGAIN, THE UNREASONABLE DELAYS, THEY WERE BECAUSE THEY WERE WAITING FOR SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T GET.

>> THAT THEY DIDN'T ASK FOR.

>> Ted: YES.

>> THERE MAY BE FAULT ON JUDGE JANSEN'S PART, THE GUY WHO HEARD THE ORIGINAL CASE OUT OF THE MOHAVE COUNTY.

THE SUPREME COURT SAID IN THIS ORDER, HEY, GET YOUR YOU KNOW WHAT IN GEAR AND DO THIS.

BUT THIS GOES TO THE WHOLE CASE WHERE ABLE SAID I ABE SAID I SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LOOK AT THESE BALLOTS BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT REGISTERED.

THE TRIAL JUDGE SAID, WAIT, YOU KNEW ABOUT THIS IN DECEMBER WHEN YOUR CASE CAME UP.

YOU CAN'T COME IN NOW AND SAY, OH, WELL I HAVE NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE OR SOMETHING I SHOULD HAVE DONE BACK THEN YOU SHOULD LET ME DO NOW.

>> Ted: THIS GOES BACK TO THE COURT OF APPEALS.

THIS IS NOT DEAD AND NEVER DIES.

>> IT NEVER DIES.

>> Ted: LET'S MOVE ON, THEN.

MARK, THE DEFAMATION SUIT AGAINST KARI LAKE, SHE WANTS THAT TO BE DISMISSED FOR SOME VERY INTERESTING REASONS.

TALK TO US ABOUT THAT.

>> SHE'S BASICALLILY USING A FIRST AMENDMENT CLAIM AND SPECIFIC LAW IN ARIZONA AND HER ARGUMENT IS, LOOK, I'M ALLOWED TO SAY WHAT I WANT TO SAY.

HE CAN'T STOP ME EVEN IF HE DOESN'T LIKE WHAT I'M SAYING ABOUT HIM.

>> Ted: EVEN IF SHE SAYS THAT HE TRIED TO PUT 300,000 ILLEGAL VOTES IN THERE, THAT HE HAD THE PRINTERS PRINTING OUT THE WRONG SIZE BALLOTS ON ELECTION DAY.

THIS IS CRIMINAL ACTION AND SHE CAN SAY THAT BECAUSE SHE CAN SAY THAT?

[ Laughter ] >> SHE IS SAYING THAT'S WHAT THE STATE LAW ALLOWS HER TO SAY.

THERE ARE CLEARLY ARGUMENTS AND STEVEN RICHER WOULD QUIBBLE AND SURE, YOU CAN SAY WHAT YOU WANT, BUT WORDS HAVE CONSEQUENCES AND ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES IS THERE HAVE BEEN THREATS TO ME AND MY FAMILY AND ALL BAD THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED TO ME.

>> THE POINT OF THESE ANTI-SLAP LAWS -- >> Ted: WHAT IS THAT?

>> AND THE PURPOSE IS BECAUSE YOU WILL HAVE CORPORATIONS, GOVERNMENT ENTITIES GOING AFTER CITIZENS WHO CHALLENGE THEM ON STUFF LIKE DEFAMATION BASICALLY MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR THEM TO PURSUE THEIR ACTIONS.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE CASE HERE BECAUSE KARI LAKE HAS HER NONPROFIT FUNDING A LOT OF THESE COSTS.

BUT THE PURPOSE IS TO STOP THESE PHONY DEFAMATION CLAIMS BRA THEY CLAIM BEFORE THEYCLAIMS BEFORETHEY GET TOO FAR IN WORK.

THIS WILL COME DOWN, IS WHAT SHE SAID LAWFUL?

IS IT DEFAMATION OR NOT?

THIS WASN'T RHETORIC AND THERE A LOT OF THAT, TOO, BUT STEVEN RICHER WAS CAUTIOUS IN WHAT HE INCLUDED.

I WAS TWO SPECIFIC CLAIMS WHERE SHE MADE SPECIFIC DETAILED ALLEGATIONS SAY YOU INJECTED 300 BOGUS BALLOTS INTO THIS AND, IT'S NOT TRUE AND HE AND I THINK BILL GATES, TOO, AND TO PRINT PRESS SIZE BALLOTS TO MAKE IT HARDER FOR KARI LAKE VOTERS TO VOTE.

THESE ARE DETAILED ALLEGATIONS AND A GOOD CHANCE TO STAY, WE HAVE TO HEAR THE DEFAMATION CASE.

THIS IS NOT JUST RHETORIC OR >> ARIZONA HAS ITS FIRST AMENDMENT AND SAYS EVERYONE PERSON MAY SPEAK ON EVERY PUBLIC.

BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR THE USE OF THAT RIGHT, SO THERE'S NOT ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO SAY WHAT YOU RIGHT.

THINGS THAT A JUDGE SAID, IN FACT, YOU DIDN'T PROVE.

YOU CAN'T SAY I HAVE AN ABSOLUTE FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SAY THINGS I CAN'T PROVE IN COURT.

>> Ted: IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHY IS THE FIRST AMENDMENT CLINIC AT ASU INVOLVED IN LAKE'S SIDE?

>> THE ARGUMENT OF THE DIRECTOR THERE, IS, WELL, YOU KNOW, WE BELIEVE IN DEFENDING PEOPLE WHO ARE ACCUSED BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS.

AND IT WAS ALSO, I THINK, A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR THEIR LAW STUDENTS TO GET SITUATIONS, SOME EXPERIENCE.

BUT THIS ISN'T A PUBLIC OFFICIAL AGAINST JOE SCHMOE.

THIS IS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL AGAINSTAGAINST A WOULD-BE PUBLIC OFFICIAL, NUMBER ONE AND JUST THE SMELL TEST ON THIS SHOULD HAVE CONVINCED SOMEBODY AT THE UNIVERSITY, WHICH DOES HAVE OVERSIGHT AT THE CLINIC THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO BE IN P IN A POSITION OF SAYING WE ARE HERE TO HELP KARI LAKE SAYING STUFF THAT IS FALSE ABOUT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL.

I UNDERSTAND THE SLAP LAW IS VERY IMPORTANT, BUT SERIOUSLY, IT'S NOT LIKE SHE DIDN'T HAVE A LAWYER OR DIDN'T HAVE A TEAM OF LAWYERS.

>> Ted: IT'S NOT JUST STUFF, BUT IT'S STUFF SAYING I THINK YOU ARE A CRIMINAL.

YOU DID CRIMINAL THINGS AND I HAVE EVIDENCE OF YOU DOING CRIMINAL THINGS.

AT WHAT POINT DO YOU STOP SOMETHING LIKE THAT?

>> TO JEREMY'S POINT, THEY WERE SPECIFIC THINGS SHE ACCUSED RICHER OF DOING AND THINGS THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN LITIGATED AND NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST EITHER THINGS WERE CLOSE TO HAPPENING.

>> THAT'S THE INTERESTING THING.

THEY'RE SAYING TRUTH DOESN'T MATTER IN THESE CASES AND I HAVE A HARD TIME ANY JUDGE WILL BELIEVE A TRUTH OF A STATEMENT DOESN'T MATTER IN A SLANDER DEFAMATION CASE.

>> UNDER THE INTERPRETATION OF BOTH, YOU KNOW, FREE SPEECH RIGHTS IN ARIZONA AND THE ANTI-SLAP LAWS, THE ARGUMENT IS AS LONG YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL REGARDING THEIR OFFICIAL DUTY AND CAPACITY, YOU CAN BASICALLY -- THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS DEFAMATION AND YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT AS LONG THEY CAN'T PROVE IT'S NOT TRUE.

THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING POSITION TO TAKE, THAT IF THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS DEFAMATION A PUBLIC OFFICIAL, PEOPLE MIGHT BE SPOUTING OFF A LOT OF THINGS.

>> Ted: ANOTHER SUPREME COURT SEEMS TO BE CAPTURING OUR ATTENTION TODAY.

THE KARI LAKE SUPPORTER IN MARICOPA COUNTY AND A COCHISE SUPERVISOR OR TO CERTIFY THEM OR HELD A NEW ELECTION AND JUDGE SAYS, NO THANKS.

>> NOT ONLY THAT IT TOOK NINE MONTHS TO FILE THIS AFTER THE ELECTION, BUT THE CLAIM IS THAT STATE LAW SAYS, AND THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE HERE, WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SIGNATURES ON BALLOT ENVELOPES, YOU COMPARE THEM TO VOTER REGISTRATION.

MARICOPA COUNTY AND OTHER COUNTIES WILL LOOK AT OTHER SIGNATURES AVAILABLE, INCLUDING EARLY BALLOTS.

THE ARGUMENT IS, HAVING PUT THOSE IN THE SYSTEM, YOU HAVE DILUTED THE VOTING STRENGTH OF THE TWO PEOPLE WHO SUED, A LAKE SPORTER AND TOM CROSBY AND HAVING DILUTED OUR VOTES AND HOW CLOSE SOME OF THE RACES ARE, WE THINK YOU SHOULD DECERTIFY THE WHOLE STATE AS YOU POINT OUT AND REDO THE ELECTION OR RECOUNT ALL OF THE OF THE EARLY BALLOTS, BUT ONLY THOSE YOU'VE GONE AHEAD AND MATCHED IT.

PART OF THE PROBLEM IS, THE ENVELOPES HAVE BEEN SONG SEPARATED FROMLONG BEENSEPARATED FROM THE BALLOTS.

THE COURT TOOK LESS THAN A WEEK TO SEND RYAN HEATHER HEATH PACKING.

TED >> Ted: THE COURT SAID COURT SAID YOU SHOULDN'T BE APPEALING THIS AND NOT YOURS.

>> KARI LAKE RAISED THE ISSUE OF IT TOOK ONLY TWO SECONDS OR THREE SECONDS AND YOU CAN'T COLLATERALLY ATTACK A JUDGE'S RULING BY COMING IN AND SAYING, OH, I HAVE A NEW THEORY.

TED THE >> Ted: THE BUSINESS OF COUNTING TOO FAST, THAT'S STILL OUT THERE?

>> THE SUPREME COURT, THEY THREW IT OUT FOR THEMSELVES AND SAID, YOU CAN'T COME TO US RIGHT NOW.

MAYBE WILE DEAL WITH IT AT ANOTHER TIME AND THIS IS NOT THE PROPER PROTOCOL FOR HOW YOU HANDLE THIS.

>> Ted: THIS ONE SAYING NO THANKS AND MAYBE AND THE OTHER ONE IS STILL PENDING.

HAMADEH GOES BACK TO APPEAL.

IT NEVER ENDS.

>> WE'LL BE SITTING HERE A YEAR TALKING ABOUT THIS LITIGATION.

>> BITE YOUR TONGUE.

[ Laughter ] >> Ted: LET'S TALK ABOUT TOM HORNE, SUPERINTENDENT ON PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, TEN MILLION DOLLARS HE GETS FROM THE STATE LAWMAKER TO PROMOTE, PUSH AND OTHERWISE GLORIFY THE VOUCHER, THE EXPANDED SCHOOL VOUCHER SYSTEM.

>> EVERY REPUBLICAN LAWMAKER GOT, I THINK, $30 MILLION TO DO WHAT THEY WANTED WITH IN THE BUDGET.

ONE WANTED TEN MILLION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION TO PROMOTE ESA'S AND VERY IMPORTANT TO REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS, THIS SCHOOL CHOICE PROGRAM.

THEY'LL PROMOTE THIS PROGRAM WHICH HAS BALLOONED AND OPENED TO ANYONE NOW AND TURNS OUT THE PEOPLE TAKING MOST ADVANTAGE OF IT ARE FOLKS PUTTING KIDS IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS AND THIS HELPS THEM TO PAY FOR PART OF IT.

I THOUGHT TOM HORNE'S COMMENTS WERE INTERESTING AND THIS HAS BEEN PROMOTED AS GIVENNING PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEND KIDS TO WHERE THEY OTHERWISE HAVE?

FOR RICH PEOPLE, THEY HAVE THESE OPPORTUNITIES AND HORN HORNeSAYS THEY NEED TO GET SOME MONEY AND WE NEED TO SPREAD THE WORD SO THEY CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE, TOO.

THIS HAS GONE FROM 11,000 OR SO TO 64,000 STUDENTS AND HE EXPECTS TO 100,000.

>> Ted: MARK, HE SAID THAT RICH PEOPLE WERE THE FIRST ON BOARD AND MORE LOWER INCOME, AS JEREMY SAID, MORE LOWER-INCOME PEOPLE INVOLVED.

IF IT'S SEVEN SOME ODD THOUSAND DOLLARS AND THE TUITION IS EIGHT OR MORE, THERE'S A LOT OF LOWER INCOME.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.

>> THAT'S ONE OF THE ARGUMENTS THAT OPPONENTS OF THE PROGRAM HAVE PUT OUT.

BUT I MEAN, IF, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU'RE HOME SCHOOLING YOUR CHILD, SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS CAN GO A WAY TO BUYING BOOKS.

SO, YES, THE PRIVATE SCHOOLS, MOST PRIVATE SCHOOLS, I'M GUESSING WHEN, HAVE, BUT THERE ARE USES FOR PARENTS WHO WANT TO USE THAT.

>> Ted: IS THERE A QUESTION THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION GETS TEN MILLION DOLLARS AND DOESN'T USE IT ON PUBLIC INSTRUCTION?

>> WELL, I ASKED THE GOVERNOR TODAY AFTER SHE CRITICIZED Mr. HORNE FOR USING THIS MONEY AND I SAID, YOU SIGNED THIS BUDGET KNOWING THAT THE MONEY WAS IN THERE FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION TO USE TO PROMOTE ESA'S AND SCHOLARSHIP VOUCHERS, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL THEM AND ALL SHE COULD SAY, WE DIDN'T GET WHAT WE WANTED.

NOW, IS THERE A POSSIBLY LITIGATION HERE?

I DON'T KNOW.

REMEMBER, THE $15 MILLION THAT WENT INTO THE PRESCOTT RODEO GROUNDS?

>> Ted: YES.

>> THAT'S BEING LITIGATED.

COULD YOU ARGUE GIVING A STATE OFFICIAL MONEY TO PROMOTE ENROLLING PEOPLE IN NOT JUST PRIVATE SCHOOLS BUT FOR-PROFIT SCHOOLS IS, IN FACT, A MISUSE OF MONEY?

THE >> Ted: IF IT'S $10 MILLION, WHATEVER THE COST THAT WE FIND OUT, AND COSTS ARE INCREASING ALL OF TIME WITH THIS VOUCHER PROGRAM, DO YOU ADD 10 MILLION TO IT?

>> IN THE GREAT SCHEME OF THINGS, THIS IS A DROP IN THE BUCKET FOR THIS PROGRAM AND GOVERNOR HOBBS AND A LOT OF THE OTHER COMPONENTS, THESE ARE 900 MILLION THAT THE COST HAS GONE UP TO AND OBVIOUSLY PEOPLE HAVE PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES.

THIS IS PUBLIC INSTRUCTION AND PROMOTING AND ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO PULL THEIR KIDS OUT OF EDUCATIONAL INSTRUCTION.

OBVIOUSLY, THERE ARE PHILOSOPHICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HOW A DEMOCRATIC, THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION WILL VIEW IT AND THE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION WILL VIEW IT.

>> THIS GETS TO THE WHOLE ISSUE OF HOW THIS UGLY ISSUE WAS PUT TOGETHER.

NOT JUST YOU GET SOME MONEY AND YOU GET SOME MONEY, BUT OTHER PEOPLE PUT SOME STUFF IN.

FROM THE SHORT STACK ON 24th 24th STREET TO DUNLAP IS 25 MILES PER HOUR.

BEN TOMA, HE GOT SOMETHING PUT IN THE BUDGET THAT SAYS ADOT HAS TO RAISE IT TO 60 MILES PER HOUR.

SO BUDGET IS A TOTAL MESS AND EVERYBODY THREW IN SOMETHING THEY WANT.

>> Ted: BEFORE WE GO, WILL WE SEE SOMETHING HIKE THIS AGAIN?

BECAUSE THEY WON'T HAVE A SURPASS LIKE THIS THE NEXT GO AROUND.

>> THEY'RE SAYING REPUBLICANS WILL HAVE TO COMPROMISE ON SOMETHING, ESPECIALLY WITH ESA'S WITH CAPPING ENROLLMENT AND THAT KIND OF THING.

SHE'S CLEARLY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE IMPACT ON THE BUDGET WILL BE?

>> Ted: GOOD TO HAVE YOU HERE AND GOOD CONVERSATION.

THAT IS IT FOR NOW.

I'M TED SIMONS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US AND YOU HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!