Thread: Breaking: Court overturns Arizona's proof of citizenship

Pueblo Politics: Court overturns Arizona's proof of citizenship requirement for voter registration

Pueblo Politics: Court overturns Arizona's proof of citizenship requirement for voter registration
Rhonda Bodfield, Arizona Daily Star Arizona Daily Star
Posted: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 11:07 am

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned Arizona’s requirement that people show proof of citizenship to register to vote.

The split decision by a three-judge panel determined that the requirement to show proof of citizenship — passed by voters in 2004 — is not consistent with the National Voter Registration Act.

Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, temporarily sitting by designation, and Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta, with chief judge Alex Kozinski dissenting, said Prop. 200 creates an additional hurdle, while the national act is intended to reduce “state-imposed obstaclesâ€

Again the Federal government interferes with the states.
No matter what any state does one Federal judge can stop it.

This is insane! Being American means nothing to these criminals. I hope when this is over they're the ones being judged. How do you win, against cheats.

And we all know Obummer and Holder had their hands in that decision.

Between all of the strange things happening with voting machines, and troop ballots, now this! I wonder how Fixed the election will become...

this is absolutely ridiculous

by the way, if its a three judge panel, how in the hell is something SPLIT?

Originally Posted by jamesw62

this is absolutely ridiculous

by the way, if its a three judge panel, how in the hell is something SPLIT?

2 votes one way , 1 vote the other way is called a "SPLIT DECISION".
All of the votes for or all of the votes against wouldn't be a split decision.

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

Originally Posted by jamesw62

this is absolutely ridiculous

by the way, if its a three judge panel, how in the hell is something SPLIT?

2 votes one way , 1 vote the other way is called a "SPLIT DECISION".
All of the votes for or all of the votes against wouldn't be a split decision.

yeah, ok, i see how that makes sense now

Court voids Arizona law on voter proof of citizenship

67 comments by Karen Gullo - Oct. 26, 2010 01:28 PM
Bloomberg

Arizona's requirement that people show proof of citizenship to register to vote was struck down by a federal appeals court, which said it conflicts with the National Voter Registration Act.

The U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco today invalidated parts of Arizonas Proposition 200, a 2004 voter- approved initiative on registration for state and federal elections. The court didnt disturb a requirement that voters show identification at the polls.

A three-judge panel of the court said the proof-of- citizenship requirement conflicted with the intent of the federal law aiming to increase voter registration by streamlining the process with a single form and removing state- imposed obstacles to registration.

The federal law requires applicants to attest to their citizenship under penalty of perjury without requiring documentary proof, the panel said.

Proposition 200 creates an additional state hurdle to registration, the judges said.

The law was challenged by voting rights and Hispanic advocacy groups.

The decision is a warning to anyone who seeks to deter or prevent voter participation that the Constitution will protect our democratic process, Thomas A. Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, a San Antonio-based group that argued the case, said in a statement.

Mika Marquart, a spokeswoman for the Arizona attorney generals office, which represented the state, declined to comment immediately.

The panel included former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day OConnor sitting as a retired justice. She was a state senator and judge in Arizona before being nominated by President Ronald Reagan to the high court, where she served from 1981 to 2006.

The case is Gonzalez v. Arizona, 08-17094, Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (San Francisco).


Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/ ... z13VqVjOpy

Originally Posted by jamesw62

this is absolutely ridiculous

by the way, if its a three judge panel, how in the hell is something SPLIT?

Agree totally! This is OUTRAGEOUS!!!! With the amount of voter fraud right now in this state, Goddard better get off his "backside" and do SOMETHING!

And perjury penalties to applicants who lie about their eligibilty ???? Well, how does one prove someone's perjured himself if one doesn't have to PROVE citizenship????

I am so enraged right now, I can barely type!