The Supreme Court has ruled against an Arizona law that requires voters to provide proof of citizenship in addition to a driver’s license before they can register to vote.
In 1993, the National Voter Registration Act was put into place, allowing qualified voters to register to vote when they applied for or renewed their driver’s licenses or applied for social services. Arizona had their own law in place to add an extra measure of assurance to this act, which is often called the Motor Voter law.
Arizona, which borders Mexico, has been trying to crack down on illegal immigration. One attempt to do this was with a law—which had been approved by voters in the state—that required prospective voters to prove their U.S. citizenship before they could use the federal registration form associated with the Motor Voter law.
The Supreme Court justices, however, voted 7–2 that this law was in violation of the National Voter Registration Act.
“[Federal law] precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” said Justice Antonin Scalia.
The decision will affect more states than just Arizona, though; Alabama, Kansas, Georgia, and Tennessee currently have a similar law in place, and 12 others have been considering one.
“Today’s decision sends a strong message that states cannot block their citizens from registering to vote by superimposing burdensome paperwork requirements on top of federal law,” said Nina Perales, vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “The Supreme Court has affirmed that all U.S. citizens have the right to register to vote using the national postcard, regardless of the state in which they live.”
Opponents believe the law to be outdated, though. Before the Arizona law had been passed in 2004 by the voters, Kathy McKee had been fighting to get it on the ballot. The Supreme Court’s decision has her and many others in an uproar because they believe it makes it harder to fight voter fraud.
“To even suggest that the honor system works, really?” McKee said. “You have to prove who you are just to use your charge card now.”
Justice Clarence Thomas was one of the two who voted in the minority, stating that the constitution “authorizes states to determine the qualifications of voters in federal elections, which necessarily includes the related power to determine whether those qualifications are satisfied.”
Others, though, see the ruling as a victory because they viewed the Arizona law as an attack on minorities, immigrants, and the elderly. They have counted over 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona who were blocked from registering in the 20 months after the restricting law passed in 2004, and 20-percent of them were Latino.
“The court has reaffirmed the essential American right to register to vote for federal election without the burdens of state voter suppression measures,” said Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
“Federal law already provides enough protection, and states should not be unduly burdening eligible citizens who want to register to vote,” Advancement Project Co-Director Penda D. Hair said.
Photo: Vof Efx/Flickr