A federal appeals court has rejected an element of Arizona’s controversial citizenship law, a decision civil rights advocates called a significant victory against fast-growing voter suppression efforts nationwide.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled April 17 that voter registration provisions of Arizona’s Proposition 200 violate the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Passed in 2004, Proposition 200 required all new voter registrants in the state to provide documents proving their citizenship. The proposition also directed county recorders to reject applications that were not accompanied by sufficient proof of citizenship, a directive that, according to voting activists, caused the rejection of tens of thousands of potential voters.
However, the 1993 act mandates that with respect to mail voter registration, “ach State shall accept and use” the federal form “for the registration of voters in elections for Federal office.” The federal form, more formally known as the National Mail Voter Registration Form, issued by the Election Assistance Commission, includes an affirmation of citizenship by the applicant under penalty of perjury.
The judges, in reviewing Inter Tribal Council of Arizona v. State of Arizona, decided that Proposition 200 did not meet the demands of the National Voter Registration Act. “Under a natural reading of the NVRA, Arizona’s rejection of every Federal Form submitted without proof of citizenship does not constitute ‘accepting and using’ the Federal Form,” the opinion read.
The case stemmed from a 2006 lawsuit brought on behalf of the Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona, State Senator Steve Gallardo, the Arizona Advocacy Network, the League of United Latin American Citizens of Arizona, the Hopi Tribe, and the League of Women Voters of Arizona, by attorneys from the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the ACLU Voting Rights Project, and the law firms of Osborne Maledon, Steptoe & Johnson and the Sparks Law Firm.
“We are elated that a strong majority of the en banc panel found Arizona’s citizenship requirement violated the NVRA,” said Jon Greenbaum, chief counsel for the Lawyers’ Committee, who argued the case before the court. “This will enable our clients to be able to register to vote and conduct voter registration drives more easily.”
The Lawyers’ Committee and others involved in the case said the decision reestablishes Congress’ oversight over federal elections at a time when several states are initiating measures that disenfranchise certain voters—particularly minority voters—including laws that require government-issued photo IDs, limit early voting opportunities and place undue restrictions on third-party voting.
The ruling also avails poor, elderly and minority voters of the mail-in voting process without the hassle, cost and risk of mailing copies of birth certificates or other evidence of citizenship.
“The court was correct in ruling that federal law does not require residents to produce unnecessary documents proving their citizenship in order to register to vote,” said Laughlin McDonald, director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project. “This is an important victory at a time many states are making it harder for people to exercise their fundamental right to vote, which is the backbone of our democracy. We hope this decision sends a message to other states that we should not be making it harder for people to participate in our political process.”
