Thread: Justices: Ariz. voter registration rules go too far

Justices: Ariz. voter registration rules go too far

Richard Wolf, USA TODAY 11:48 a.m. EDT June 17, 2013

Supreme Court ruling could block other states from imposing new restrictions on citizens seeking to register to vote.


Arizona Attorney General Thomas Horne talks with reporters outside the Supreme Court after oral arguments in the state's voter registration case March 18.(Photo: Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images)
Story Highlights

• Physical proof of citizenship was required before registering to vote
• Justices say Congress has authority over federal elections
• 7-2 decision was written by Justice Antonin Scalia; Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court ruled handily Monday that Arizona cannot add to federal voter registration requirements by demanding proof of citizenship.
The ruling, which could impact other states as well, is at least a temporary victory for liberals who want to expand access to the polls and a defeat for conservatives concerned about potential election fraud.
In a 7-2 decision written by Justice Antonin Scalia, the court said Arizona's proof of citizenship requirement -- passed by voters in 2004 -- went too far beyond the 1993 federal "motor voter" law that was designed to simplify voter registration procedures.
The federal law requires registrants to claim U.S. citizenship on a mail-in post card, under penalty of perjury. The Arizona law requires separate physical proof of citizenship. The justices' decision upholds congressional authority over federal elections and could make it harder for states to impose additional restrictions.
However, Scalia said Arizona could try a different approach to challenge the federal law's pre-emption, thereby holding out the possibility that the state could resurrect its proof-of-citizenship requirement.
The federal law "forbids states to demand that an applicant submit additional information beyond that required by the federal form," Scalia said in announcing his decision from the bench. While he appeared to sympathize with the state's goal of requiring better proof of citizenship, he said it lacked the authority to do so without federal approval.
GENERIC DRUGS: Court hits drug companies' profit-sharing deals
MIRANDA RIGHTS: Silence isn't golden for suspect, court rules
The ruling was hailed by voting-rights groups. "Today's decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law," said Nina Perales of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the lead counsel for the state law's challengers.
The case represents the lesser of two voting rights cases before the court this term. Far more significant is Shelby County v. Holder, an Alabama county's challenge to the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965, which requires mostly Southern states with a history of discrimination to clear proposed voting changes with the federal government before implementing them. Arizona is one of the states covered by the provision.
"It is our hope that the court will continue in this vein when it issues the Shelby v. Holder decision," said Barbara Arnwine, president of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "It would be a false promise for today's decision to promise equal access to the ballot and for an adverse ruling in Shelby to snatch this away."
While a decision in the Voting Rights Act case is anticipated this week or next, the Arizona case proved an easier nut for the justices to crack.
Arizona voters approved Proposition 200 in 2004, requiring more specific proof of citizenship. During the next three years, more than 30,000 people were turned away for failing to provide documentation. Voter registration dropped by 44% in Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix.
A federal district court upheld the referendum, but it was thrown out on appeal. The state then brought the case to the Supreme Court.
At the crux of the issue is the Constitution's elections clause, which says states can set the times, places and manner of holding federal elections -- but that Congress can make changes.
During oral arguments in March, conservative justices expressed sympathy for Arizona, which must fight a disproportionate share of the nation's battle against illegal immigration. Still, some of them joined in ruling that the state should have sought changes in the federal law rather than going around it.
Only Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the opinion.
The verdict came a year after the court issued a split decision on Arizona's first-in-the-nation immigration law. The court tossed out several provisions designed to crack down on illegal immigrants but upheld the most controversial one -- allowing police to check immigration papers while enforcing other laws.
Four other states -- Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee -- require proof of citizenship before residents can register to vote. About 30 states have voter identification requirements at the polls, designed to thwart impostors seeking to cast illegal ballots.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/17/supreme-court-arizona-voting-citizenship-states-congress-registration/2166965/

Realtime Coverage

Voter Proof-of-Citizenship Law Voided by Supreme Court Businessweek - ‎47 minutes ago‎ The U.S. Supreme Court threw out an Arizona law that required evidence of citizenship when people register to vote, in a victory for minority-rights advocates and the Obama administration. The justices, voting 7-2, said Arizona's proof-of-citizenship law runs ... CBS News ABC News Bloomberg U.S. News & World Report NPR The Independent azcentral.com KSDK TPM UPI.com AZFamily Raw Story Global Grind The Slatest Constitution Daily (blog) Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona Law Requiring Proof of Citizenship to Vote KNVN - ‎16 minutes ago‎ Summary of Supreme Court Actions Monday ABC News - ‎17 minutes ago‎ SCOTUS Slams Door On Proof-Of-Citizenship State Laws TPM - ‎20 minutes ago‎ High court rules AZ citizen proof voter registration law illegal kgw.com - ‎20 minutes ago‎ High court strikes down Arizona's proof-of-citizenship law MSNBC (blog) - ‎22 minutes ago‎ Show recently hidden articles In Depth Supreme Court says states may not add citizenship proof for voting Washington Post - ‎26 minutes ago‎ States may not require additional proof of citizenship on federal forms designed to streamline voter-registration procedures, the Supreme Court ruled Monday. The court rejected a requirement passed by Arizona voters in 2004 that potential voters supply proof ... Court: Ariz. citizenship proof law illegal Philly.com - ‎41 minutes ago‎ A police officer keeps watch outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Monday, June 17, 2013. With a week remaining in the current Supreme Court term, several major cases are still outstanding that could have widespread political impact on same-sex ... Justices: Ariz. voter registration rules go too far USA TODAY - ‎1 hour ago‎ Supreme Court ruling could block other states from imposing new restrictions on citizens seeking to register to vote. Arizona court case. Arizona Attorney General Thomas Horne talks with reporters outside the Supreme Court after oral arguments in the state's ... Supreme Court strikes down Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship to vote NBCNews.com (blog) - ‎1 hour ago‎ NBC's Pete Williams reports on the 7-2 decision that knocked down Arizona's requirement for would-be voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship. By Pete Williams and Erin McClam, NBC News. The Supreme Court on Monday struck down an Arizona law that ... Supreme Court says Arizona cannot ask for proof of citizenship for federal voter ... Minneapolis Star Tribune - ‎8 minutes ago‎ U.S. History students from Austin, Minn., visited the Supreme Court in Washington on Monday, June 17, 2013, in anticipation of key decisions being announced. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite, Associated Press - Ap. Camera Star Tribune photo galleries. Camera ... Your preferred source Supreme Court blocks Arizona law on voter registration Los Angeles Times - ‎1 hour ago‎ WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court threw out an Arizona law Monday and by a surprisingly lopsided vote, ruling state officials may not demand a proof of citizenship from residents who register to vote. The 7-2 decision written by Justice Antonin Scalia said ... Supreme Court Rules Against Arizona Proof of Citizenship Law U.S. News & World Report - ‎20 minutes ago‎ The key portion of a 2004 Arizona law that required residents to show proof of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote in a federal election was struck down by the Supreme Court Monday, but it may not be as big a victory as opponents of the law hope. Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona Voting Rules Wall Street Journal - ‎1 hour ago‎ WASHINGTON—Arizona violated the federal “Motor Voter” law when it added a proof-of-citizenship requirement to standard voter-registration forms intended for use nationwide, the Supreme Court held Monday. The ruling comes a year after the Supreme ... See all 97 articles »

Supreme Court: Arizona law requiring citizenship proof for voters is illegal

Published June 17, 2013
Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot on their own require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up easier.

The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona's voter-approved requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal "Motor Voter" voter registration law.

Federal law "precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself," Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court's majority.

The court was considering the legality of Arizona's requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a registration form produced under the federal "motor voter" registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn't require such documentation, trumps Arizona's Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

"Today's decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law," said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and lead counsel for the voters who challenged Proposition 200.

"The Supreme Court has affirmed that all U.S. citizens have the right to register to vote using the national postcard, regardless of the state in which they live," she said.

The case focuses on Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican border. But it has broader implications because four other states -- Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee -- have similar requirements, and 12 other states are contemplating such legislation.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court's ruling.

The Constitution "authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied," Thomas said in his dissent.

Opponents of Arizona's law see it as an attack on vulnerable voter groups such as minorities, immigrants and the elderly. They say they've counted more than 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona who easily could have registered before Proposition 200 but were blocked initially by the law in the 20 months after it passed in 2004. They say about 20 percent of those thwarted were Latino.

Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, called the decision a victory. "The court has reaffirmed the essential American right to register to vote for federal election without the burdens of state voter suppression measures," she said.

But Arizona officials say they should be able to pass laws to stop illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from getting on their voting rolls. The Arizona voting law was part of a package that also denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants and required Arizonans to show identification before voting.

The federal "motor voter" law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a resident applies for a driver's license or certain benefits. Another provision of that law -- the one at issue before the court -- requires states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn't require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials require an Arizona driver's license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will reject the federal registration application form.

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if they get the approval of the federal government and the federal courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision made by the government on that request back to court. Other states have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission "recently approved a state-specific instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana driver's license, ID card or Social Security number to attach additional documentation to the completed federal form," Scalia said.

The case is 12-71, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...#ixzz2WUoakYRx

The States are going to have to enforce the perjury laws....

RELATED http://www.alipac.us/f12/ted-cruz-am...ter-id-281212/

RELATED http://www.alipac.us/f12/arizona-kee...-forms-281215/