Ruben and Kate Gallego can't hide their divorce papers from the public.

In a ruling late Wednesday, the Arizona Supreme Court rejected a request by the couple to delay Yavapai County Superior Court Judge John Napper's order releasing the bulk of documents from the 2016 filing. Her lawyers wanted time to convince the judges that they should give them a chance to argue that Napper was wrong.

“The Court concludes that the Gallegos have not demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits,” Judge Clint Bolick wrote for the unanimous court. “Nor have they demonstrated irreparable harm with any specificity if the reprieve is not granted.”'

And Bolick said the couple failed to provide evidence that there were serious legal issues that needed to be addressed – or that the difficulties of releasing the information were significantly greater than The Washington Free Beacon's argument that that Withholding information is detrimental to the public interest.

It is unclear how quickly the documents could be published. Napper had previously said he would order their release on Friday.

Wednesday's order comes despite attorney Daniel Arellano's arguments that they should be wrong about keeping the documents secret, at least while they decide the merits of the case.

“Improper unsealing of any portion of the underlying divorce record is irreparable and cannot be cured later if a decision is made in error,” the attorney wrote in the new pleadings.

“This court or any other court cannot ring the proverbial bell once previously sealed information has been unsealed,” Arellano told the justices. “Even if this court overturned the high court’s decision, the Gallegos’ rights to retain portions of it would remain void.” “The sealed or redacted record would have been invalidated without a stay.”

At the very least, the couple wants time to make the case that much of the information contained in the file should not be released to the public.

“This court must issue a stay to allow the Gallegos an opportunity to seek review and to allow the court to consider the petition,” Arellano said. “Without a suspension, the damage will be immense and irreparable.”
Lawyers for Beacon, a conservative online website that often attacks Democrats, filed their own response late Wednesday. They told the judges that the Gallegos had not met the legal requirements for a delay in releasing the documents in the divorce case.

Last but not least, lawyers said the couple's delay and attempt to send the case back to Napper is causing harm.

“This process will mean that the media and voters will not know about these supposedly public records until all votes are cast,” they said. “This damage to the media and voters is time-sensitive and irreparable and began a week ago with the “start of early voting, a problem that will worsen every day until November 5.”

Ruben is on the ballot to run for Senate and Kate wants another term as mayor of Phoenix.
“The Free Beacon is demanding the release of court documents reflecting the character and conduct of a public figure who holds and is running for federal office and an official who currently holds executive power over one of the nation's largest cities,” the lawyers said in a statement to an earlier court filing.
All of this is because Ruben, already a member of Congress, filed for divorce from Phoenix Mayor Kate in 2016.

Ruben admits that this happened when she was about to give birth. He never specifically addressed all of the issues that led to the lawsuit, but said in his memoirs that he suffered from post-traumatic stress syndrome after returning from Iraq.

But while the couple lived in Maricopa County, the case was filed in Yavapai County. And they convinced the judge at the time – not Napper – not only to seal the files, but also to keep the entire matter off the court docket.

The divorce became clear years later when Ruben married Sydney Barron, who worked for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and is now employed by the National Association of Realtors.

Beacon's lawyers recently said the publication learned of these records and requested that they be unsealed.

Napper agreed to allow the couple to keep some things secret, including information about their son and some financial details. But everything else was open to the public, he explained, even ruling that “the original order sealing the entire file was inadmissible under court rules.”

Dissatisfied with the limited redactions Napper allowed, the couple sought relief from the state Court of Appeals. But the couple had no better luck there, with appeals judge Brian Furuya writing for the unanimous three-judge panel last week that Napper had not abused his discretion in denying certain redactions requested by the couple.

“The State of Arizona initially assumes that court records are available to the public,” Furuya wrote. “The burden is on the party denying a motion to unseal to demonstrate why the records should not be unsealed.”

In this case, the appeals judge wrote, that meant the couple “must demonstrate continuing or new compelling circumstances prohibiting access to court documents or parts thereof.”
“You cannot cope with this burden,” Furuya wrote.

Arellano said this was not about shielding either of them's official activities from the public, saying these records were “completely unrelated to their official duties.” And then there is the son, “who is not a civil servant and enjoys a high level of privacy and security.” interests in his own right.''

“Sensitive details about the lives of the Gallegos and their minor child must be made public if Free Beacon succeeds,” Arellano said.

“Contrary to the Free Beacon's previous assertions, its interest, let alone a constitutional one, will not be compromised by proceeding with caution and suspending the high court's order while litigation continues,” he said. “They are still free to criticize that.” Gallegos as much as they like, and the Gallegos should not be denied a stay simply because the Free Beacon would prefer to release the details of the recordings before the upcoming general election .”

Lawyers for the Beacon have indicated in previous legal filings that it would be acceptable to keep some small portions of the information contained in the filing secret. But they said what the Gallegos asked Napper to keep secret went too far.

“Without even having access to what was redacted, The Free Beacon was able to see that the proposed redactions resulted in a file that looked like a secret Central Intelligence Agency file, with pages and pages of black ink intended to ensure “that no one knew about it.” “continues,” they wrote.