Thread: Kansas, Arizona prevail in voter citizenship suit

Kansas, Arizona prevail in voter citizenship suit

Posted: Mar 19, 2014 9:59 AM PDT Updated: Mar 19, 2014 10:08 AM PDT

• ARIZONA POLITICS
  

By JOHN HANNA
Associated Press

TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) - A federal judge on Wednesday ordered the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to help Kansas and Arizona enforce laws requiring new voters to provide proof of their U.S. citizenship.
U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren in Wichita, Kan., ruled the commission has no legal authority to deny requests from Kansas and Arizona to add state-specific instructions to a national voter registration form. The states and their top election officials - secretaries of state Kris Kobach of Kansas and Ken Bennett of Arizona - sued the agency to force the action.

Both states require new voters to provide proof of their U.S. citizenship to election officials. The federal registration form requires only that prospective voters sign a statement that they are citizens.

While most voters in both states register with state forms, their officials said the availability of the federal form created a loophole as they tried to enforce the proof-of-citizenship requirements.

"I am absolutely delighted," Kobach said in an interview. "This is a really big victory."

The federal agency did not immediately return a telephone message seeking comment.

Melgren said the U.S. Constitution gives states the power to set voter qualifications, and Congress has not pre-empted it, even in enacting a federal voter-registration law in the 1990s.

"Because the Court finds that Congress has not pre-empted state laws requiring proof of citizenship through the National Voter Registration Act, the Court finds the decision of the EAC denying the states' requests to be unlawful and in excess of its statutory authority" Melgren wrote.

Kansas, Arizona prevail in voter citizenship suit - FOX 10 News | myfoxphoenix.com http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/story/25...#ixzz2wQiFM9Wz

RELATED

http://www.alipac.us/f9/judge-decide...g-rule-297346/

Judge says U.S. must help states enforce voter-ID laws

Jonathan Gibby/Getty Images

Election volunteer Vicki Groff places a sign to direct voters to a polling station at Kenilworth School in Phoenix in February 2012.

FROM WIRE REPORTS
Published: 19 March 2014 06:46 PM
Updated: 19 March 2014 06:46 PM[/COLOR]

PHOENIX — A federal judge in Kansas on Wednesday ordered federal election authorities to help Kansas and Arizona require their voters to show proof of citizenship in state and local elections, in effect sanctioning a two-tier voter registration system that could set a trend for other Republican-dominated states.

The judge, Eric F. Melgren of U.S. District Court in Wichita, Kan., ruled that the Election Assistance Commission had no legal authority to deny requests from Kansas and Arizona to add state-specific instructions to a national voter registration form, and ordered the agency to add the language requested by the states. Kansas and Arizona had sued the agency to force the action.

The Supreme Court ruled in June that Congress has full power over federal election rules but it left open whether states could require proof of citizenship in their own elections. Federal rules require prospective voters only to sign a form attesting to their citizenship, a procedure favored by Democrats who want to increase participation of minorities and the poor in elections, but which Republican officials say fosters voter fraud.

“Because the court finds that Congress has not pre-empted state laws requiring proof of citizenship through the National Voter Registration Act, the court finds the decision of the EAC denying the states’ requests to be unlawful and in excess of its statutory authority,” Melgren wrote.

The Arizona attorney general, Tom Horne, said in an interview that “this decision is an important victory against the Obama administration because it ensures that only U.S. citizens, and not illegals, vote in Arizona elections.”

Richard L. Hasen, an expert on voting regulations at the University of California, Irvine, wrote in a blog on Wednesday, “The upshot of this opinion, if it stands on appeal, is that states with Republican legislatures and/or Republican chief election officials are likely to require documentary proof of citizenship for voting, making it harder for Democrats to pursue a relatively simple method of voter registration.”

If the two-tier system moves forward, states that use it would make separate ballots covering only federal races for voters who do not provide proof of citizenship.

Melgren wrote in his decision that because states have the right to data - including citizenship documentation - that would help them determine voter eligibility, and because both states had already concluded that oaths declaring citizenship were insufficient proof of citizenship, the commission’s ruling was “without legal support and is incorrect.”

More than 10,000 Kansas voters have had their voting rights suspended for failing to provide proof of citizenship.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local...er-id-laws.ece

Occasionally common sense prevails after all.

Friday, 21 Mar 2014 05:21 PM
By Lisa Barron
newsmax

A U.S. District Court Judge's ruling this week that federal officials must help Arizona and Kansas enforce state laws requiring new voters to prove they are U.S. citizens is a big victory for the two states, says Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne.

"This case started with a trial, and a federal district judge here in Arizona found after that trial that voter fraud is a significant problem in Arizona," he told Newsmax TV's John Bachman, J.D. Hayworth and Morgan Thompson.

"There were over 200 people who swore on jury commissioner forms that they were not citizens who were found to have registered to vote. Now, only about 10 percent of people get these jury forms. So you really have to multiply it by 10, which means that, on this basis alone, there are at least 2,000 people in Arizona who registered fraudulently and we have statewide elections that have been won by less than 2,000 votes," he said.

"So voter fraud is a significant problem and this helps us assure that only American citizens, and not illegal aliens, will vote."

Horne served as Arizona Department of Education Superintendent of Public Instruction from 2003- 2011.

He claimed that there is a liberal media cover-up of voter fraud in Arizona. "The media have been constantly in a — it's especially our newspaper and one of the channels that's connected with the newspaper have been running articles saying that voter fraud is a myth, and they've been defending that by counting how many people were actually prosecuted," Horne said.

"I mentioned earlier to you that over 200 people — which, it came out of a sample of 10 percent so it really means over 2,000 people — were caught having registered to vote and then swearing on a commissioner form that they were not citizens. In the trial, it came out that of those 200 people, only 10 were prosecuted because local county attorneys have robbery, rape, murder, all kinds of serious crimes to deal with and limited resources so they don't necessarily give a high priority to prosecuting voter fraud cases."

Horne continued, "But the evidence at the trial proved that voter fraud is a serious problem and the number of prosecutions is a completely false metric, and they're using that to cover up the problem and make people falsely believe that voter fraud is not a serious problem when, in fact, we have a federal district judge that listened to evidence for six days and concluded that it is a serious problem."

As for what the ruling means for other states, Horne said, "Assuming this decision will be upheld on the merits . . . on appeal…[it] will establish that the states have a right to ask for evidence of citizenship when they're registered voters if they want to. And so it won't require more litigation. The states can just go ahead and do it. So any state that wants to, it's just up to their legislatures or their voters, if they have initiatives, can pass a law saying if you want to register to vote, show evidence of citizenship because we only want American citizens to vote and not illegal aliens."

Horne rejected the notion that requiring proof of citizenship causes voter disenfranchisement. "In fact, we have a finding by our trial court, after a six-day trial, that said that it's not an undue burden. You have a lot of choices in Arizona. You can write down your driver's license number or a non-operator's identification number the motor vehicles division will give you, or, if you're a naturalized citizen, your naturalization number, or a passport, or a birth certificate," he said.

"In fact, out of a state of over six million people, they were only able to find one single person who couldn't meet those requirements. She was about 100 years old and she'd been born in the Old South when they didn't have birth certificates there. And, of course, we would let her vote if she wanted to."

"So it's been actually demonstrated in trial that this is not a burden on citizens' ability to register and vote, but, of course, you would never get that from the liberal media," Horne added.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/vot.../21/id/561032/

Updated article--

Judge says U.S. must help states enforce voter-ID laws

Fernanda Santos and Timothy Williams

Jonathan Gibby/Getty Images--Election volunteer Vicki Groff places a sign to direct voters to a polling station at Kenilworth School in Phoenix in February 2012.

FROM WIRE REPORTS
Published: 19 March 2014 06:46 PM
Updated: 19 March 2014 08:21 PM

PHOENIX — A federal judge in Kansas on Wednesday ordered federal election authorities to help Kansas and Arizona require their voters to show proof of citizenship in state and local elections, in effect sanctioning a two-tier voter registration system that could set a trend for other Republican-dominated states.

Judge Eric F. Melgren of the U.S. District Court in Wichita, Kan., ruled that the federal Election Assistance Commission had no legal authority to deny requests from Kansas and Arizona to add state-specific instructions to a national voter registration form. The states sued the agency to force the action after it had turned them down.

The Supreme Court ruled in June that Congress holds full power over federal election rules but indicated that states could require proof of citizenship in state and local elections. Federal rules require prospective voters only to sign a form attesting to their citizenship, a procedure that is favored by Democrats. who want to increase participation of minorities and the poor in elections, but that Republican officials say fosters voter fraud.

In his ruling, Melgren, who was appointed to the bench by President George W. Bush, characterized the decision by the election commission to deny the states’ requests as “unlawful and in excess of its statutory authority.” He said that Congress had not “pre-empted state laws requiring proof of citizenship through the National Voter Registration Act.”

Proof of citizenship became a requirement in Arizona under Proposition 200, approved in 2004 - the law struck down by the Supreme Court in June - as part of the long legal and political fight against illegal immigration in this border state. Gov. Sam Brownback of Kansas, a Republican, signed a similar law in 2011.

In an interview, the Arizona attorney general, Tom Horne, also a Republican, said, “This decision is an important victory against the Obama administration because it ensures that only U.S. citizens, and not illegals, vote in Arizona elections.”

The secretary of state of Kansas, Kris W. Kobach, a Republican and one of the most forceful advocates nationally against illegal immigration, called the ruling “a win for states’ rights.” He added, “We have now paved the way for all 50 states to protect their voter rolls and ensure that only U.S. citizens can vote.”

There has been little evidence of in-person voter fraud or efforts by noncitizens to vote, but the poor and minorities are likely to be affected. Studies have shown that the poor and minorities often lack passports and access to birth certificates needed to register under the laws in question.

Melgren’s decision holds particular significance this election year, as it could prevent thousands of people from voting just as the governorship and other major offices are on the ballot in both states.

In a blog post Wednesday, Richard L. Hasen, an expert on voting regulations at the law school of the University of California, Irvine, wrote, “The upshot of this opinion, if it stands on appeal, is that states with Republican legislatures and/or Republican chief election officials are likely to require documentary proof of citizenship for voting, making it harder for Democrats to pursue a relatively simple method of voter registration.”

Defenders of voter identification laws argue that fraud is hard to detect but still a real danger and that Americans uncomplainingly present identification for getting on airplanes and numerous other things, so asking the same for voting, a sacred right of democracy, is only appropriate.

The ruling takes effect immediately unless the courts grant a stay pending an appeal. The Justice Department said that it was reviewing the court’s decision.

If the ruling stands, Kansas and Arizona could be forced to maintain separate ballots covering only federal races for voters who do not provide proof of citizenship, thus excluding them from state and local races. Ultimately, though, it would allow officials to “move forward with one way of becoming a registered voter in Arizona, as Proposition 200 required when passed 10 years ago,” the state’s secretary of state, Ken Bennett, a Republican, said Wednesday.

But Jenny Rose Flanagan, director of voting and elections for Common Cause, said, “From where I sit, eligible voters, citizens, are going to be pushed out of the process yet again because of this political maneuvering.”

Advocates like Flanagan say that newly naturalized citizens, victims of domestic violence who leave all of their belongings behind when they flee an abusive relationship, and poor rural residents born at home and devoid of birth certificates are some of the groups that would be particularly vulnerable.

It would also complicate the training of volunteers to register voters by adding another layer to a task the National Voter Registration Act, signed by Congress in 1993, had sought to simplify.

“The more layers you add to the process, the more you open it up for mistakes, and that’s a problem because every mistake you make means that a legitimate voter could be disqualified,” said Raquel Terán, Arizona director for Mi Familia Vota, which works to increase Latinos’ participation.

The case against the Election Assistance Commission stems from a decision by its acting executive director, Alice Miller, to defer action on the requests by Kansas and Arizona to include state-specific instructions to the federal voter registration form. All four commissioner positions on the panel are vacant, as Congress has yet to confirm President Barack Obama’s nominees.

In his ruling, Melgren raised doubts over whether Miller had the authority to make that judgment, although he did not specifically address the question.

More than 10,000 Kansas voters have had their voting rights suspended for failing to provide proof of citizenship.
In Arizona, Bennett said that since the Supreme Court’s decision, about 2,000 people who registered using the federal form had failed to provide proof of citizenship. County officials have been working to reach them to obtain such proof, he said. Meanwhile, they remain on a separate list, and if they are not removed in time, they will not be able to vote in the state races this year.


http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local...er-id-laws.ece

Above article added to Homepage--

http://www.alipac.us/content/kansas-...hip-suit-2760/

Bravo!

by Ken Klukowski 1 Apr 2014, 12:02 PM PDT
breitbart.com

Kansas and Arizona scored a big victory on ballot box integrity laws, one that the losing side is already appealing.

In 2013, Breitbart News reported about the outcome of Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council at the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court held seven to two that states' laws requiring proof of citizenship are generally preempted by federal law.

But in his opinion for the court, Justice Antonin Scalia noted that federal law allowed states to request that the Election Assistance Commission (EAC)—a federal agency created in 2002—include citizenship documentation items in any state’s customized version of the “Federal Form” designed by the EAC.

The two other conservative justices, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, dissented. Alito argued that the federal law allowed states to add the citizen-proof requirement, and Thomas added that if the federal law did not, it would unconstitutionally infringe upon state sovereignty.

Even though the majority rejected those positions, Scalia noted that Louisiana had received such permission years ago; therefore, there was no good reason for denying it to Arizona or other states. He added that any state requesting a citizenship-proof requirement could sue if its request was denied.

Breitbart News then reported that elected officials were formulating a battle plan to follow Scalia’s road map. Kansas and Arizona made requests, which were not granted. They then sued.

Now they have won in federal district court in Wichita, Kansas. In a 28-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Eric Melgren ordered the EAC to grant the requests Kansas and Arizona made months ago.

“This is a huge victory for the states of Kansas and Arizona. They have successfully protected our sovereign right to set and enforce the qualifications for registering to vote,” Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach—a rising conservative star in the Republican Party—said in a statement. Kobach is the lead plaintiff in the case, joined by his state of Kansas, the state of Arizona, and Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett.

“There were over 200 people who swore on jury commissioner forms that they were not citizens who were found to have registered to vote,” Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne explained to another outlet. Noting that only ten percent of voters receive a jury summons, Horne reasoned that this means a bare minimum of 2,000 fraudulent registrations had occurred, and he noted that statewide races had been lost by fewer votes than that.

The district court held a six-day trial considering evidence and testimony, then ruled in favor of the states. “So voter fraud is a significant problem and this helps us ensure that only American citizens, and not illegal aliens, will vote,” summarized Horne.

Arizona’s law is typical of the flexibility voters have to fulfill this requirement. “You can write down your driver’s license number or a non-operator’s identification number the motor vehicles division will give you, or, if you’re a naturalized citizen, your naturalization number, or a passport, or a birth certificate,” Horne concluded.

“Judge Melgren’s decision is very carefully researched and well-reasoned,” Kobach, who is also an accomplished law professor, told the media. “This is going to be a difficult decision for them to overturn on appeal.”

Many national Democratic leaders contend that voter fraud is a non-issue, and that those who claim it impacts elections are seeking to suppress votes that tend to be cast for Democrats. President Barack Obama and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder are committed opponents of citizenship-proof laws. Yet a recent video from Florida shows non-citizens not only registered to vote—but actually casting votes.

Polling indicates conservatives and Republicans are on safe ground regarding this issue. A March 25, 2014, Rasmussen poll reveals that 78 percent of Americans favor requiring a person to show proof of citizenship before voting.

Without this ruling, Kansas and Arizona would have had to consider two voting options: one election system for federal congressional and presidential elections that would not require proof of citizenship and a separate voter roll for state and local elections. “Because of this victory there will be no need for a dual election system,” Kobach stated.

This case will now go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Denver.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...enship-to-Vote