home

9th Circuit Tosses AZ Voter Proof of Citizenship Requirement

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals today struck down Arizona's Prop 200, requiring voters to show proof of citizenship when registering to vote and proof of identification when casting ballots. The opinion is here:

Proposition 200 requires prospective voters in Arizona to present documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote, ... and requires registered voters to present proof of identification in order to cast a ballot at the polls.... This appeal raises the questions whether Proposition 200 violates the Voting Rights Act § 2, 42 U.S.C. § 1973, is unconstitutional under the Fourteenth or Twenty-fourth Amendments of the Constitution, or is void as inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA)....

We hold that the NVRA supersedes Proposition 200’s voter registration procedures, and that Arizona’s documentary proof of citizenship requirement for registration is therefore invalid.

The Court upheld the portion requiring voters to show identification when casting ballots. The likely effect: [More..]

Opponents of the 6-year-old law incorporating both provisions — designed to prevent illegal immigrants from voting — said the ruling would likely lead to thousands being turned away at next Tuesday’s elections for lacking the required identification records.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ invalidation of requirements for proof of citizenship comes too late for any prospective new voters who were barred from registering before the deadline for the Nov. 2 U.S. mid-term elections.

One of the groups challenging the law, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, estimates that since 2004 when the law was enacted, 30,000 Arizona residents were prevented from registering to vote by the requirement.

Georgia is the only other state with a similar law:

Georgia checks its voter registration rolls against its motor vehicle database. Those whose vehicle records indicate they are not citizens are allowed to register to vote, but their ballot will be discounted unless they show proof of citizenship, he said. That system is still undergoing preliminary federal review before it can take full effect.
< Supreme Court Lifts Stay in Landrigan Exeuction | Tom DeLay Jury Selected >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    These voter ID laws (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by eric on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:42:08 AM EST
    have nothing to do with preventing voter fraud.  There is no voter fraud problem.  Instead, the laws are intended to prevent certain people from voting.  Think about who is least likely to have an ID:  poor people, people who live in urban areas and don't have a drivers license, and young people.  Guess how all of these people vote?  Yes, that's right, they're Democrats.  Requiring an ID is the perfect way to disenfranchise a lot of Democrats.

    It's no coincidence that Republicans tend to favor these laws.

    They don't ALL vote Democratic. You shouldn't (none / 0) (#16)
    by Angel on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:46:45 AM EST
    make that blanket statement.  Otherwise, I agree with your comments.  I get aggravated when people try to put everyone in a box....

    Parent
    Well, of course (none / 0) (#17)
    by eric on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:49:33 AM EST
    not everyone, but these constituencies are very strongly Democratic.

    Parent
    And really, why shouldn't non-citizens be able to (1.00 / 1) (#1)
    by beefeater on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 02:57:20 AM EST
    Vote in our elections? We should turn over all of our important decisions to the much more superior intelligence of the world community. How arrogant of this country to do otherwise.

    There are untold numbers of... (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 08:01:41 AM EST
    red blooded American citizens without proper ID at any given time...their right to vote can not and should not be denied.

    Parent
    Surely George Koros... (none / 0) (#31)
    by diogenes on Sat Oct 30, 2010 at 11:22:39 PM EST
    Surely there is a political organization which can help every prospective voter get a proper ID.  Or else just say that governments which pass these laws must give free ID's to those who ask.

    Parent
    We shouldn't need ID's to vote with (none / 0) (#32)
    by Harry Saxon on Sun Oct 31, 2010 at 09:18:42 AM EST
    unless you're in favor of a "Big Brother" approach to government.

    Parent
    What's the problem (none / 0) (#2)
    by jbindc on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 07:39:22 AM EST
    With showing ID when you vote?  Shouldn't we know that when "John Smith" of 123 Cherry Lane in Ferndale, Michigan goes to vote at his voting precinct, that it's really the same "John Smith"? Haven't states started accommodating those without drivers' licenses by offering free state ID cards (or at least, I remember lots of talk about it)?

    Cuz the right to vote... (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 08:07:38 AM EST
    is too precious to potentially deny it simply because a voter lost their wallet, left it at home, or let their license expire.

    I don't get this obsession with paper...I go to vote, give my name and address, the dedicated poll workers find my name on the voter roll, I sign the roll, I vote...whats wrong with that system?  

    Besides, Is there any evidence whatsoever of a significant number of non-citizens attempting to vote?  

    Parent

    I have to agree with this one (none / 0) (#6)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 08:23:59 AM EST
    Strike the provision requiring proof of citizenship, but uphold the proof of identification.

    If I'm a poll worker, I have no idea if you are who you say you are.

    Parent

    Just wait till... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 08:36:39 AM EST
    partisan poll workers start going over ID's with fine tooth combs..."Sorry ma'am, your voter registration says 123 Cherry Lane, but your ID says 123 Cherry Road...you can't vote."

    "Sorry sir, your identification expired on 11/1/10, this is not valid ID...you can't vote."

    "Sorry, your ID says your first name is Deshawn but your voter registration says your first name is De'shawn...you can't vote."

    Parent

    And it says you're 5'7"....but you're (none / 0) (#8)
    by Angel on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 08:55:06 AM EST
    actually 5'8".  Your eyes look green to me but here it says they're hazel.  Sorry - can't vote, you fraud.

    Parent
    The increased possibility... (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:01:55 AM EST
    of voter intimidation is endless with an ID requirement.

    And what is the greater sin?  A citizen's voting rights denied or a non-citizen slipping through the cracks and voting?  No brainer in my book...you err on the side of voting rights.

    Parent

    Absolutely agree. (none / 0) (#10)
    by Angel on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:06:43 AM EST
     

    Parent
    You can leave a blood sample for a DNA test (none / 0) (#11)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:07:28 AM EST
    But seriously, in most states don't you get your voter registration when you get your license? The data is the same. There are always tons of poll workers at a precinct, so if there was an issue with one you could conceivably talk to another, or a supervisor.

    It's not perfect, but there are so many reports every election about voter fraud that I wouldn't have a problem with it.

    Of course, I do live in Florida, and after the 2000 election, I probably should want it to be as simple as possible here.

    Parent

    Voter fraud... (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:21:39 AM EST
    I know Brand R claims Brand D are registering non-citizens on the regular, but I'm not sure I buy it is a pressing problem that requires a ID requirement fix.  The big voter fraud issues I see are shadiness on the part of election holders and vote counters, note voters.

    Sh*t another page in my book says if you live here you should have a say in who runs the joint...is it really that terrible a thing for people to get involved and invested?

    I just can't get worked up about a non-citizen voting like I get worked up about a citizen denied their voting rights because of a "papers please" requirement.  Like our criminal justice principles say letting 10,000 guilty go free is preferred to one innocent man being convicted...better to have 10,000 felons or undocumented residents vote than to deny one citizen their voting rights.  

    Not that I buy there are hoardes of non-citizens looking to influence our elections...they're too busy raking leaves & washing dishes to worry about Brand R vs Brand D faux choices.

    Parent

    I guess you're right in that if you're gonna (none / 0) (#13)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:24:35 AM EST
    err, err on the side of voting rights. If we make more rules for voters, we make more opportunities to pervert the system.

    Parent
    Well said... (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:35:36 AM EST
    more rules, regs, and restrictions = more loopholes and more ways to game the thing.

    I'm also not keen on "papers please" getting out of hand in general...this was always an area where the USofA shined in the past among democracies, you didn't need government paper to every damn little thing...it's a tradition worth preserving as much as possible.  

    We need papers to work, we need papers to drive, we need papers to medicate ourselves, we need papers to sell hotdogs on the corner...enough with the paper.  

    Parent

    You prefer rolling papers right? lol (none / 0) (#18)
    by republicratitarian on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 09:52:50 AM EST
    LOL... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 10:11:37 AM EST
    the law requiring you carry those at all times is of the unwritten variety:)

    Parent
    You are thinking about how this would (none / 0) (#20)
    by MO Blue on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 10:20:26 AM EST
    apply to you. To you this would not be a problem because you have a drivers license and probably would be able to access a birth certificate if need be.

    There are many older people, primarily minority voters, who do not have drivers licenses. Some in rural areas, do not even have birth certificates. What other form of proof do you suggest to allow people with a legitimate right to vote the ability to do so?

    Parent

    Don't they have 'non driving' license (none / 0) (#21)
    by nyjets on Wed Oct 27, 2010 at 10:38:29 AM EST
    Doesn't the DMV issue licenses that you can use for identification purposes but do not allow you to drive a vehicle.

    Parent