High Court Strikes Down Arizona’s Proof of Citizenship Law, Providing Important Protection for Voters

It’s a good week for residents of Arizona!

Just a few days ago, the Arizona state legislature passed Governor Jan Brewer’s Medicaid expansion proposal, bringing health care coverage to 238,000 low-income Arizonans.

And yesterday, the Supreme Court handed down an opinion that will make it easier for Arizonans to exercise their right to vote.

This morning the Supreme Court decided Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. In this closely-watched case, Arizona residents and civil rights groups challenged a state law that made it harder to vote. The controversial law put the burden on would-be voters to affirmatively prove their U.S. citizenship in order to register.

This law and others like it are serious threats to our right to vote, and they are especially harmful to women voters. Recent studies show that these restrictive voter registration laws disproportionately affect women, who often lack proof of citizenship in their current legal names. Only 66% of voting-age women with access to documents proving citizenship have documents in their current legal names, and only 48% of these women can show birth certificates with their current legal names [PDF]. Women also make up the majority of college students and senior citizens – both populations that are less likely to have qualifying forms of identification. Restrictive voting laws like Arizona’s require these women to jump through hoops in order to register, expending time and money to obtain the necessary documentation.

Yesterday the Supreme Court struck down Arizona’s law, holding that it conflicted with a less burdensome federal law. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) requires a simple registration form that asks applicants to confirm – no documentation required – that they are citizens. Writing for a 7-2 majority, Justice Scalia pointed out that the federal form aimed to increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for federal office. Arizona’s law frustrated this goal, discouraging many eligible voters from registering. It upset the careful balance that the NVRA strikes between registering every eligible voter while protecting against voter fraud.   

The Court’s ruling is an important step forward. It brings us closer to ensuring that voter registration is open and accessible to all citizens, regardless of their identities and without hassle, headache, or economic hardship. Threats to this promise are real, and we must continue to stand guard against active efforts across the country to exclude eligible voters from exercising their rights.