Supreme Court rejects Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship voting law

 

McClatchy Washington Bureau

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down an Arizona law requiring that people registering to vote in federal elections provide proof of U.S. citizenship.

In the latest round of an immigration debate pitting state vs. federal powers, the court in a 7-2 decision declared that Arizona’s law went too far. Conservative and liberal justices agreed that, at least when it comes to voter registration, federal law prevails.

“When Congress legislates with respect to the times, places and manner of holding congressional elections, it necessarily displaces some element of a . . . legal regime erected by the states,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority.

The decision is a blow to officials in Alabama, Kansas, Georgia and Texas, who had urged the Supreme Court to let Arizona’s law stand.

The court’s decision also comes almost exactly one year after a different lineup of justices, likewise, struck down separate Arizona provisions meant to crack down on illegal immigrants. In the earlier case, the court’s majority ruled that federal law pre-empted parts of an Arizona law requiring that immigrants carry documents showing proof of legal U.S. residency.

The staunchly conservative Scalia dissented from last year’s Arizona decision, but on Monday he led a majority that included one fellow conservative, Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., as well as the members of the court’s liberal wing.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

“Today’s decision is a victory for all Americans,” declared Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “The court has reaffirmed the essential American right to register to vote for federal election without the burdens of state voter suppression measures."

Under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, sometimes known as the Motor Voter Act, states are required to “accept and use” a standard federal form when registering voters by mail or through motor vehicle departments. Passed over Republican opposition, the law was intended to make it easier for potential voters to register. The federal form includes a simple attestation that one is a citizen and eligible to vote.

In 2004, though, Arizona voters approved Proposition 200, which required that registrants provide evidence of U.S. citizenship. The proof could be a passport, a birth certificate or tribal identification, among other documents. The state law mandated that Arizona officials reject the registration application of anyone who submitted the federal form but omitted the proof of citizenship.

State officials said the documentary proof was necessary to protect against fraudulent registrations provided by activist groups, including the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, known as ACORN.

“On one particular occasion we had gotten a group (of applicants) in . . . and there were 24 that said, ‘I am not a citizen,”’ the Maricopa County recorder testified at one point, according to Arizona’s legal brief.

But the American Civil Liberties Union noted Monday that “in Arizona, 90 percent of the over 31,000 U.S. citizens whose voter registration applications were denied were actually born in the United States.”

In its 18-page decision Monday, the court’s majority did not dispute the importance of ensuring voter registration integrity, and it did not touch on immigration control at all.

Instead, much of Scalia’s reasoning reached back to the so-called Elections Clause of the Constitution. While the provision declares that the times, places and manners of holding elections “shall be prescribed in each state,” the provision also notes that “Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations.”

“The Elections Clause requires that Arizona’s law give way,” Scalia reasoned.

Scalia added that Arizona may still have some other options open to it, including asking the federal Election Assistance Commission to alter the voter registration form so that it requires additional information. At the same time, Scalia acknowledged that the commission currently has no members and so is not in a position to do anything for the state.

In his dissent, Alito countered that “it is appropriate to presume that states retain” the authority to set voter registration requirements as long as Congress has not clearly specified otherwise.

The court is scheduled to end its 2012 term next week, with key decisions concerning affirmative action, the Voting Rights Act and same-sex marriage still to come.

Email: mdoyle@mcclatchydc.com; Twitter: @MichaelDoyle10

Read more Politics Wires stories from the Miami Herald

  •  
This photo taken June 30, 2014 shows North Carolina Republican Congressional candidate David Rouzer, right, talking with campaign aide Tyler Foote in Raleigh, N.C. Rouzer is favored to win the House seat that North Carolina Democrat Mike McIntyre is surrendering after 18 years. Democrats long have claimed that Republicans abused their legislative powers to elect a disproportionate number of U.S. House members. A court in Florida is lending credence to their complaint, and North Carolina Democrats are fighting a GOP-drawn map in state court. The battles are shining a new light on the fiercely partisan practice of gerrymandering, in which state officials draw congressional districts to help their party. Both parties have done it for decades, but Republicans refined the practice in 2011, a year after they won control of numerous state governments preparing to redraw congressional maps based on the 2010 census. It’s one reason Republicans hold a solid House majority even though Americans cast 1.4 million more votes for Democratic House candidates than for GOP House candidates in 2012.

    GOP keeps House edge in Democratic-leaning states

    Democrats have long claimed that Republicans abused their legislative powers to elect a disproportionate number of U.S. House members. Now a Florida court is lending credence to their complaint.

  •  
This combination image of President Barack Obama shows him, left, talking about the economy during a visit to Denver on July 9, 2014, and right, talking at the White House in Washington about the situation in Iraq on June 19, 2014. There's the confident Obama ridiculing opponents to the delight of his supporters.  Then there's the increasingly unpopular president hobbled by gridlock in Washington and foreign policy crises.  While Obama has long sought refuge away from the capital when his frustrations boiled over, the gap between his outside and inside games has perhaps never been bigger.

    Obama relishes roadshow, but agenda still stuck

    Welcome to Barack Obama's split-screen presidency.

  •  
FILE - In this Sept. 14, 2012 file photo shows Libyan military guards check one of the U.S. consulate's burned buildings in Benghazi, after a deadly attack on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012, that killed four Americans. Two of the four deaths might have been prevented if military leaders knew more about the intensity of the sporadic gunfire directed at the CIA facility where Americans had taken refuge and they had pressed to get a rescue team there faster.

    Fog of war in Benghazi hampered military response

    The military might have been able to prevent two of the four U.S. deaths in Benghazi if commanders had known more about the intensity of the sporadic gunfire directed at the CIA installation where Americans had taken refuge and had pressed to get a rescue team there faster, according to senior military leaders.

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Marketplace

Today's Circulars

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category