Thread: Voter-ID law's key elements upheld

Voter-ID law's key elements upheld
Judge: Arizona measure doesn't violate U.S. act

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... 0830.html#
Matthew Benson
The Arizona Republic
Aug. 30, 2007 12:00 AM

A federal judge has ruled that key parts of Arizona's voter-approved law requiring proof of citizenship to vote are constitutional and don't violate federal or state law.

In a ruling issued Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Roslyn Silver rejected nine claims against the law known as Proposition 200, including cornerstone complaints that it violates the National Voter Registration Act and constitutes a poll tax.

Secretary of State Jan Brewer hailed the order as a "big victory for the people of Arizona." She promised to continue defending the law if the case is appealed by plaintiffs, who include the Arizona Advocacy Network and Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.

A representative of the fund said the ruling will be appealed.

"We think that the judge got it wrong," said Nina Perales, Southwest regional counsel with MALDEF. We think that she did not apply the law the way it should've been, and we expect these rulings to be overturned on appeal."

For Arizona voters, the ruling means a continuance of the practice of proving citizenship when registering to vote and providing legal ID at polling places.

Voters approved Proposition 200 in November 2004. Silver earlier had cleared the way for the law to be used in the state's 2006 elections, concluding that determining whether someone is a U.S. citizen "is of paramount importance when determining his or her eligibility to vote."

Linda Brown, executive director of the Arizona Advocacy Network, conceded her disappointment in this week's ruling but noted that two of the lawsuit's major complaints remain. Those claims, which appear to be headed for trial, argue that Proposition 200's ID requirements place an undue burden on legal residents and disproportionately affect minority voting.

It's unknown when the lawsuit will be tried, Brown said, adding, "We are eager to have this decided well in advance of the 2008 election."

Proposition 200 has been the source of controversy since long before the citizens initiative was handily approved by voters.

The law, which requires individuals to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote and legal ID when casting a ballot, was promoted as a means to reduce voter fraud. Opponents have long called that concern overblown.

Rather than merely blocking undocumented immigrants from the ballot box, Brown said, the law has deterred legal citizens who lack identification to prove their citizenship.

She pointed to "a couple thousand" ballots that were cast but not counted in last November's general election. In those instances, voters were allowed to cast what are known as conditional provisional ballots. The special ballots are counted if the voter returns within 72 hours with proper ID. But in the 2,000 cases, the voters were unable to show ID or never returned.

"The harm this law is causing to citizens greatly outweighs any perceived protection," Brown said.

The Secretary of State's Office countered that the number of ballots turned away in 2006 constituted a fraction of the more than 1.5 million cast.

A trial awaits on the remaining portions of the Proposition 200 lawsuit, though Brewer expressed confidence that the latest ruling may signal that the legal wrangling is drawing to a close.

"It is pretty much, I believe, completed and finished," Brewer said. "I would think, at this point, (the plaintiffs) would realize the people have spoken. The courts have concurred. Let's get on with it."

Thank you for posting, however this is a duplicate post. Please search for titile and author to help reduce posts.

http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... ht=arizona