Would reopening the Redistricting Commission nomination process violate the AZ Constitution?

As the clock winds toward 10 p.m. and I have to get ready for bed so that I am wide awake for tomorrow's meeting of the Arizona Commission on Appellate Court Appointments, I am struck by a thought (don't be so shocked.  It happens once in a while, even to me :) ) -

If the Appellate Court Appointments commission reopens the nomination process for the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission (AIRC) because Russell Pearce and Kirk Adams were successful in their efforts to force two of the Republican nominees to withdraw because Pearce and Adams didn't approve of them, wouldn't that be giving the Republicans 12 nominees to choose from? 

If so, that could create a problem for Chief Justice Berch and the rest of the Appellate Court Appointments commission.

From Article Four, Part Two, Section One, Paragraph Five of the Arizona Constitution -

By January 8 of years ending in one, the commission on appellate court appointments or its designee shall establish a pool of persons who are willing to serve on and are qualified for appointment to the independent redistricting commission. The pool of candidates shall consist of twenty-five nominees, with ten nominees from each of the two largest political parties in Arizona based on party registration, and five who are not registered with either of the two largest political parties in Arizona.

Mark Schnepf and Steve Sossaman withdrew their names at the direct urging of Pearce and Adams.  They were never found to be unqualified for the AIRC.

Pearce and Adams had 10 nominees to choose from, and they chose to eliminate two of them from consideration.

As such, they have nothing to complain about.

Of course, since this will be going down on West Washington, little things like the facts and the Arizona Constitution may be pushed aside by partisan bullying. 

We'll see tomorrow.

Good night everyone...