When election results are contested and litigation ensues, it’s essential for courts to act swiftly. Unresolved legal battles can fuel divisions, increase political polarization, and even lead to unrest. Yet most states do not require courts to resolve election disputes by any specific deadlines, which has resulted in needlessly prolonged disputes.¹

Earlier this month, the Arizona Supreme Court took a wise step toward ensuring a speedier resolution of election disputes in the state. It issued an administrative order requiring judges to prioritize election-related disputes, to issue orders with plenty of time for the appellate process to play itself out, and to explain themselves if they take longer than 60 days to rule.

Other state’s regulatory authorities would be wise to follow suit. When courts act quickly and transparently, they demonstrate that legal disputes will be resolved fairly, reducing the risk of baseless claims spreading unchecked.

Post-election litigation may be the new normal. The quicker the legal questions are answered, the sooner the country can return to normalcy, allowing democracy to function as intended. That’s a win for us all.

^{1. For example, Arizona still has multiple pending cases regarding the outcome of the 2022 midterm elections. See https://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2024/10/15/hamadeh-refuses-to-give-up-quest-for-re-vote-of-ag-race/}