Arizona’s new voting laws that require proof of citizenship are not discriminatory, judge rules
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
A federal judge is upholding provisions of new Arizona laws that would require counties to verify the status of registered voters who haven’t provided proof of U.S. citizenship and cross-check voter registration information with various government databases.
In a ruling Thursday, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton concluded Arizona legislators did not discriminate when they adopted the laws and the state does have an interest in preventing voter fraud and limiting voting to those individuals eligible to vote.
“Considering the evidence as a whole, the court concludes that Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in Arizona’s elections outweighs the limited burden voters might encounter when required to provide (documentary proof of citizenship),” she wrote.
However, Bolton said the requirement for individuals using a state registration form to include their state or country of birth violates a provision of the Civil Rights Act and a section of the National Voter Registration Act. Doing so, she explained, would result in the investigation of only naturalized citizens based on county recorders’ subjective beliefs that a naturalized individual is a non-citizen.
The lengthy ruling summarizes testimony from a bench trial in late 2023 at which experts testified about Arizona’s history of voting discrimination. That included literacy tests effectively precluding Native American and Latino voters from participating and voter roll purges in the 1970s and 80s that created barriers for minorities to re-register to vote.
That was the past, the judge wrote, noting there was no evidence presented by the plaintiffs reflecting an intent by lawmakers to suppress voter registrations of members of minority groups or naturalized citizens when they considered the bills in 2022.
The laws were passed amid a wave of proposals that Republicans introduced in the wake of Joe Biden’s 2020 victory in Arizona over Donald Trump.
In an earlier ruling, Bolton blocked a requirement in Arizona law that people who use a federal voter registration form provide additional proof of citizenship if they want to vote for president or use the state’s vote-by-mail system. The judge had ruled those provisions were trumped by a 1993 federal voter registration law.
She also had ruled that a 2018 consent decree prevents Arizona from enforcing its new requirement to reject any state voter registration forms that aren’t accompanied by proof of citizenship. The decree said Arizona may not reject an otherwise valid state voter registration form without proof of citizenship, but rather must register such an applicant for federal elections.
Arizona is required to accept the federal registration form, but anyone who does not provide proof of citizenship is only allowed to vote for president, the U.S. House or Senate. The federal form requires people to swear they are U.S. citizens, but there is no proof requirement.
Federal-only voters have been a subject of political wrangling since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2013 that Arizona cannot require documentary proof of citizenship for people to vote in national elections. The state responded by creating two classes of voters: those who can vote in all races and those who can vote only in federal elections.
After being approved on party-line votes, then-Republican Gov. Doug Ducey signed the measures into law.
“Election integrity means counting every lawful vote and prohibiting any attempt to illegally cast a vote,” Ducey wrote in a March 2022 letter when approving one of the proposals.
The laws were challenged by voting rights groups and the U.S. Department of Justice . They argued the new rules would make registering voters more difficult. Some also suggested the statutes were an attempt to get the issue back in front of a more conservative Supreme Court.
While supporters said the measures would affect only voters who have not shown proof of citizenship, voting advocates claimed hundreds of thousands of people who haven’t recently updated their voter registration or driver’s license could be affected.
The ruling states that Arizona has required documentary proof of citizenship since 2005, and the new laws supplement that requirement to ensure non-citizens do not register to vote or remain on the voter rolls.
One of the two measures examined by Bolton would require state election officials to cross check registration information with various government databases to try to prove their citizenship and report anyone they can’t find to prosecutors.
“The court finds that though it may occur, non-citizens voting in Arizona is quite rare, and non-citizen voter fraud in Arizona is rarer still,” the ruling states. “But while the voting laws are not likely to meaningfully reduce possible non-citizen voting in Arizona, they could help to prevent non-citizens from registering or voting.”
Tags
Who is online
44 visitors
And, Arizona does it again - how's it feel Biden?
“Election integrity means counting every lawful vote and prohibiting any attempt to illegally cast a vote,” Ducey wrote
Voter registration as of 2022 for AZ was 4,143,929. So, IF "voting advocates claimed hundreds of thousands of people who haven’t recently updated their voter registration or driver’s license could be affected.", there is a serious implication that somebody has miscounted.
Outstanding!
Probably not bad, did you actually read the decision? They do not have to present proof of citizenship to vote in the federal elections for President,VP, congress and senate.
Proof of Citizenship Requirements
Important Information Regarding Proof of Citizenship
A person must be a U.S. citizen in order to register and vote.
A person who submits valid proof of citizenship with his or her voter registration form (regardless of the type of form submitted) is entitled to vote in all federal, state, county and local elections in which he or she is eligible. The voter registration form otherwise must be sufficiently complete.
A person is not required to submit proof of citizenship with the voter registration form, but failure to do so means the person will only be eligible to vote in federal elections (known as being a "federal only" voter). A "federal only" voter will become eligible to vote a "full ballot" in all federal, state, county and local elections if he or she later provides valid proof of citizenship to the appropriate County Recorder's office.
Federal only voters may use the Federal Voter Registration form, available here:
Accepted Proof of Citizenship Information
If you have an Arizona drivers license or non-operating identification card issued after October 1, 1996, you will only need to list the license number on box 9 of the voter registration form.
If you do not have an Arizona license you may need to provide one of the following documents to establish proof of citizenship:
How the bolded sections 4 and 5 worked in MN was that a month before the 2016 presidential election the tribes were notified that the Tribal Enrollment card or the CIB card were no longer accepted as proof of ID...Disregarding the small fact that they are accepted and authorized by the Feds and have always been used as legal ID. A judge issued an emergency restraining order stopping the Native voter suppression BS.
After seeing the circus in AZ for the past couple of years when it was all said and done Biden got additional 300 votes.
I think proof of citizenship is fine when you register to vote, after that people should not be asked to prove their citizenship every time they vote in an election. one time when you register and that's it
Why?
Why should a citizen have to show proof of citizenship every time they vote?
Why not?
Is it some kind of unreasonable imposition? Not to me it’s not but honestly, I have no problem with the one and done check on citizenship as long as it translates nationally. I would however require proof of residency for all where folks vote. Every time they vote.
Again, I see no reasonable argument for not providing such information. Every time one votes.
To make sure non citizens do not vote in US elections
Tell you what. Next time you are stopped by a cop and he asks you to show him your license tell him you already showed it to the last cop that stopped you so you shouldn't have to show it anymore and let us know how it goes.
I've been voting since 1972 and no one has ever asked me to prove that I'm an American citizen other than when I registered to vote 50 years ago
your analogy is not a good one. A better analogy would be if the police have your drivers license in their computer, in their mobile phone and when you were stopped you just told them your name and they looked it up and they saw the drivers license with your picture on it and you're good to go
when someone registers to vote that information should be in the state database permanently. When you register to vote you sign a form with your signature , that signature is kept with your registration information and relayed to the precinct where you vote. when you go in to vote on Election Day you sign a form with your name on it and they match that signature to the signature that they havein their laptop in front of them from your registration information . that's all they need
“Why?”
i’m guessing election integrity isn’t that important to some.
Only to those with the right letter following their name. Notice there were no charges against those who questioned the 2016 election?
You shouldn’t have to show a license to a cop, either, if the only reason is to prove you have one. It should just be on file with the state. Now, if he’s going to write you a ticket or arrest you, then yeah, you should have to identify yourself. I don’t see why that couldn’t be done with a computer in the police car.
There’s a difference between questioning an election and violently rioting to stop its lawful implementation. I would think that should be obvious.
Non answer noted
White privilege no doubt..
I don't recall him being in any riot. Perhaps you have proof of such activity?
“Him?” Who are you talking about? I didn’t mention any particular person, and neither did you.
You involved in the comments and you don't even know who you are referring to.
As I said, I didn’t reference any particular person. And you can’t be bothered to explain yourself. Speak plainly when you talk to me. If you want to play games, find someone else.
Really? You want to play that game? Move along.
Is that "MAGA Charm Offensive" working?
Some people have suggested (including our illustrious VP) that minorities should not have to show ID in order to vote because they don't know where a kinkos is, or other such nonsense. It seems that has pissed off more than just a few minorities. Is it your conjecture that they could get an ID but are not capable of remembering to bring it every time they vote?
John
I think I agree with you (imagine that)
I think proof of citizenship should be provided when a person registers to vote and thereafter a picture ID merely proves that they are that registered voter.
Of course, but that isn't what they want.
Of course, but that isn't what they want.
Well who are "they" and what do they want?
They are democrats and they want one party rule.
Take it from NT's newly christened "blowhard"
In California they simply take the people's word.
Agreed. If someone else tries to vote in my name, that should be caught easily.
Didn’t democrats come out and say a couple years ago that they are for voter id requirements? Yes, yes they did. So what’s the problem, dems?
That was when the "new guy" beat their asses at their own game. They also wanted to abolish the EC then too.
Exactly
I see they have to be citizens, nothing about being alive, so Chicago voting rules will still be able to be utilized.
Don't leave Ohio out of that.
I don’t object to showing ID to vote, but I doubt that the need is urgent. I also doubt that the old-timers manning my polling place are qualified to examine and validate ID in the first place.
In Michigan you used to show a valid ID and they cross reference that with your address on a print out to insure you are valid to vote in that district. This might have changed since I’ve voted absentee the last couple elections but I believe an absentee ballots does the same thing based on the information you fill out on the ballot. Name, address and signature. Signature being the least helpful to insuring voter bona fides
They have these wonderful machines to do that. They read the strip on the back of your driver's license or identification card that matches you up with the information listed in their system. Most fake ID's don't have a working strip; nor are they on file in the State data base which it is matched against.
I vote in person every time- except for Covid when the polling places weren't open and had to use a drop box- that wasn't secured- not even a camera above it. It was near the police station, fire house, and library. But when I dropped off the ballots for my family there wasn't anyone there. They didn't even have a damn light directly above the box.
When I vote din person my driver's license is scanned every time- and I am still force to fill out an ID form that gets numbered and matched to the ballot # being cast.
So did I, for about 40 years. I take advantage of Absentee ballots now.
It’s nice.