Thread: Arizona: Lawsuit seeks to void Prop 200 voting provisions

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/hourlyupdate/128385.php

Published: 05.09.2006

Lawsuit seeks to void Prop 200 voting provisions
By Howard Fischer
CAPITOL MEDIA SERVICES
PHOENIX -- A Hispanic rights law firm filed suit Tuesday asking a federal judge to void the voting provisions of Proposition 200.

The lawsuit by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund attacks provisions of the law which requires proof of citizenship to register to vote and certain forms of identification to cast a ballot. Attorney Nina Perales said Latinos are less likely to have the kinds of ID required.

"As a result, significant numbers of Latinos attempting to register and turn out to vote are denied the right to vote,'' she said. And Perales said because Hispanics are a significant proportion of the people who are naturalized - people who need different documents - the law has a harsher effect on them, making it illegal.

And Lydia Camarillo, vice president of the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, said the legislation and the practices of state officials in enforcing it amount to "attacking and profiling the Latino community and other communities of ethnic color."

But Perales, under questioning from reporters, insisted this isn't strictly a Hispanic issue. She said the law affects anyone who is poor and doesn't have a driver's license or other documents.

"By requiring people to have to purchase forms of identification, whether it's a birth certificate or a driver's license, whether it's to register to vote or also to appear and vote in person on election day is a modern day poll tax,'' she said, something constitutionally prohibited.

Joe Kanefield, the state elections director, countered there is a big difference between requiring someone to pay money to the government to exercise the right to vote and simply mandating that they provide proper documentation - even if it does cost them money to get those documents.

The lawsuit also challenges the decision by Secretary of State Jan Brewer to block registration to vote of those who use a federally approved form but do not also submit proof of citizenship. That form, unlike state law, does not require such proof.

This isn't the first time that issue has been raised.

Two months ago the U.S. Election Assistance Commission wrote to Brewer, telling her that federal law precludes her and county election officials from refusing to register people who submit this form.

But Kevin Tyne, the deputy secretary of state, insisted states are free to impose requirements above and beyond what is required by federal law. And that, he said, is precisely what voters did two years ago when they adopted Proposition 200.

"We are following that law as passed by the voters of this state," said Tyne. "We're fully prepared to defend Prop 200, the will of the voters."
The lawsuit is being brought on behalf of individuals who Perales said have been denied the right to register and may be turned away from the polls.

Other plaintiffs include community organizations like Chicanos Por La Causa and the Arizona Hispanic Community Forum.

MALDEF mounted a separate legal challenge to Proposition 200 shortly after the 2004 election, seeking to overturn another provision which denies certain public benefits to those not in this country illegally. But a federal appeals court tossed the case, saying there was no evidence that anyone legally entitled to those benefits was in danger of being prosecuted for breaking the law.

http://www.kpho.com/Global/story.asp?S=4881431&nav=23Ku

Groups' lawsuit challenges Prop 20 voting provisions



PHOENIX The Mexican American Legal Defense and Eduational Fund and other groups today filed a lawsuit challenging voter identification requirements imposed by Proposition 200, a state law approved by Arizona voters in 2004.

The lawsuit was filed in U-S District Court in Phoenix by MALDEF (mall-deaf), Chicanos Por La Causa, Friendly House, Valle del Sol Southwest Voter Registration Education Project and the Arizona Hispanic Community Forum.

The groups are requesting a court order requiring the state to accept voter registrations that use a form mandated by Congress in a 1993 law. The groups say the state's refusal to accept registrations using that federal form without the state-required identification has thwarted voter registration drives.

The lawsuit also contends that the 2004 Arizona law's voter identification requirement violate the U-S Constitution and the federal Voting Rights Act.

Hispanics are a significant proportion of the people who are naturalized - people who need different documents -

a "naturalized" citizen WOULD have the appropriate documents.

"By requiring people to have to purchase forms of identification, whether it's a birth certificate or a driver's license, whether it's to register to vote or also to appear and vote in person on election day is a modern day poll tax,'' she said, something constitutionally prohibited.

wonder where it is "constitutionally prohibited" -- if all "citizens" of the state are subject to the same law, it is NOT unconstitutional and it is NOT discrimination. The Constitution GUARANTEES each state a republican form of government --- the state chose to exercise that right

Easy to see where illegal alien advocates are going with this. Hmmmm...they think..... let's see what creative ways we can come up with to let illegal aliens vote. it just gets better with each passing day......we are in trouble.

This is so much BS from the mex groups. And Brewer should be fired for being an illiterate idiot.
The Voter registration Act mandates that states can make their own forms if they use one form for both federal and State elections
as long as it contains all of the info in the fed form. It also mandates that the States maintain accurate voter lists with respect to eligibility to vote by verifying eligibility, address , previous felonies etc.
The fact that Illegals can't produce birth certificates , or citizenship papers is a no-brainer. I believe that the plaintiffs in the case are grossly overestimating the number of naturalized citizens and even then, its' not an impossible task. But that's not the States' problem. That's the individuals task .
If the Feds really want to enforce the Voter Registration Act then they should suggest that the State lock up the plaintiffs for 5 years for willfull, knowing presentation of fraudulent voter registration applications.

MALDEF has filed esentially the same lawsuit against the state several times over and each time it has been tossed or ruled against. I think they keep filing new suits to make the state spend money trying to fight them. "There aught to be a law against this..."

http://www.azcentral.com

Lawsuit questions legality of ID rules for elections
Law hurts Latinos, groups say

Matthew Benson and Robbie Sherwood
The Arizona Republic
May. 10, 2006 12:00 AM

A lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court asks that voter-identification and registration requirements imposed under the 2004 election law known as Proposition 200 be declared unconstitutional.

Several Latino advocacy groups brought the suit on behalf of a handful of Arizona residents. The lawsuit says that Proposition 200, approved by voters, should be stricken down because of its dampening effect on minority voting.

It's unclear when the court will decide the issue, but the plaintiffs are seeking a temporary restraining order against Proposition 200, potentially putting the measure on ice for next week's local elections.

Longer term, the suit asks for a court injunction against the measure. Critics say the measure's requirements for proof of citizenship when registering to vote and proper identification when voting have a disproportionate impact on minority voters, who are less likely to meet the requirements.

"By requiring people to have to purchase forms of identification, whether it's a birth certificate or a driver's license, whether it's to register to vote or also to appear and vote in person on Election Day, is a modern-day poll tax," attorney Nina Perales said Tuesday at a news conference.

The suit cites three residents who say they weren't able to register to vote because they lacked proof of citizenship and one who wasn't allowed to vote because he didn't have proper identification. Each is Hispanic.

But the discrimination claims were refuted by Kathy McKee, the Glendale woman who helped author Proposition 200. "These provisions apply to everyone: me, you, everyone," she said, adding that proof of identity is a mainstay of modern society, whether you're renting a movie or using a city facility.

Groups such as Valle Del Sol and Southwest Voter Registration Education Project also are behind the suit. They say Proposition 200's proof-of-citizenship requirements, which the state also is enforcing on federal registration forms used nationwide, have hurt their ability to sign up Latino voters.

Other plaintiffs for the suit filed in a U.S. District Court in Phoenix include the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Friendly House, Chicanos Por La Causa and the Arizona Hispanic Community Forum.

Secretary of State Jan Brewer was defiant, shrugging off the lawsuit as "another effort to undo what was passed at the ballot box."

"We're prepared to defend the will of the voters," said Brewer, a Republican. "I'm going to do my job. Over 1 million people voted for Prop. 200. The law is the law."


Controversy continues


Controversy has followed Proposition 200 from the start.

Advocates supported the measure as a way to keep undocumented immigrants from the ballot box and reduce voter fraud.

But critics have called the fraud fear overblown and unsubstantiated and have maintained that the measure would disenfranchise legal residents who lack proper identification. In many cases, that means minorities and the poor, they say.

McKee said Proposition 200 has fended off four legal challenges already, three of which came before voters had their say in 2004. "I think it's pretty pathetic," she said of the continued legal maneuvering. "I'm 100 percent confident there's nothing discriminatory about the words or intent of Prop. 200 or how it's being administered."

In recent months, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission has clashed with Brewer over whether Arizona can require voter registrants who use a nationwide federal form to also produce the proof of citizenship, such as passport or driver's license, as required by Proposition 200. The federal form is often used by military and overseas voters.

Brewer continues to defy the commission, but the issue has opened the door for efforts such as Tuesday's suit.

Another coalition of advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, Arizona Advocacy Network, People for the American Way Foundation, League of United Latin American Citizens and League of Women Voters, plans to file suit over the same voter-identification issues.

"We know these rules will disenfranchise a lot of legitimate voters," said Linda Brown, executive director of the Arizona Advocacy Network. "It was a solution in search of a problem. The evidence of non-documented people voting has been nil, but we're looking at perhaps thousands or tens of thousands of citizens being disenfranchised by these rules. And those numbers can turn elections."

Brown said she expects that both lawsuits will likely be consolidated if a judge agrees to take the case.


Looking ahead


The lawsuits stem in part from Arizona voters who say they were wrongly disenfranchised in the April municipal elections.

But the legal action has clear implications for the November general election when as many as 2 million Arizona voters could go to the polls.

Brown expects that Proposition 200's performance during its first outing in last month's local elections in Maricopa County will be a central piece of evidence in the suit.

Of the roughly 30,000 voters at the polls on Election Day, 177 had to vote "conditional provisional ballots" because they lacked proper ID. Those votes cannot be counted unless the voter returns, identification in hand, to an appointed elections office within 72 hours.

Of those, just 62 returned with proper identification, leaving 115 whose votes were not counted. That number could be magnified many-fold in a statewide election.

"What does worry you, in a statewide election, we would have had between 5,000 and 6,000 with these conditional provisional ballots," said Karen Osborne, Maricopa County elections director. "So we worry about how to get those voters back in."

Osborne is named as a defendant in the lawsuit, along with Brewer and county clerks and election officials from across the state.

I believe I have to show my drivers license to vote -- I just don't pay it any attention, because they were going by the rules.

these poll watchers were members of our church -- they have known me for over 35 years!

http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=5010 ... =menu216_2

Judge considers undoing Prop 200 ID requirement

June 9, 2006, 12:28 PM

A federal judge is considering whether to order Arizona election officials to accept federal mail-in voter registration forms without requiring proof of citizenship as mandated under a 2004 state law approved by voters.

Numerous minority and activist groups recently sued to challenge provisions of Proposition 200 requiring would-be voters to submit proof of citizenship when registering and proof of identity when casting ballots at polling places.

As part of the suit, the groups asked that state and county officials be temporarily blocked from requiring that the federal registration form, which requires that the registrant state under penalty of perjury that he or she is a citizen, be accompanied by additional documentation of citizenship.

The groups said the federal government has mandated use of the form as-is and that requiring additional documentation cripples drives to increase voter registration.

A lawyer for the state argued during a hearing Friday in federal court that the state is permitted to verify the eligibility of people registering to vote and that the policy debate over Proposition 200 is over.

U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver said she'll rule next week.

Latinos are less likely to have the kinds of ID required.

Latino's that are natural born or naturalized citizens have the ID required by law ...

A lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court asks that voter-identification and registration requirements imposed under the 2004 election law known as Proposition 200 be declared unconstitutional.

the Constitution grants citizens the right to vote -- proof of citizenship isn't unconstitutional -- allowing people to vote without verifying citizenship would be a violation

The suit cites three residents who say they weren't able to register to vote because they lacked proof of citizenship and one who wasn't allowed to vote because he didn't have proper identification. Each is Hispanic.

"residents" aren't guaranteed the right to vote -- "citizens" are -- including each one that is Hispanic

Proposition 200. "These provisions apply to everyone: me, you, everyone,"

"citizens" are guaranteed "equal protection" under the law -- provisions that apply to all citizens are not unconstitutional and verifying citizenship is protecting the rights of the citizens and the states

A lawyer for the state argued during a hearing Friday in federal court that the state is permitted to verify the eligibility of people registering to vote and that the policy debate over Proposition 200 is over.

every state is guaranteed a "republican form of government" -- Arizona exercised that right when the citizens, those with the right to vote, passed Proposition 200 which affects their voting rights only -- clearly the "citizens" have no problem with Proposition 200