Illegals in Arizona can vote!

[Bill Graham]

Supreme Court rules Arizona cannot force people to show proof of US
citizenship in order to register to vote.

Click for more on this story:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/17/supreme-court-arizona-citizenship-proof-law-illegal/

[Greegor]

On Jun 17, 9:08 pm, "Bill Graham" <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Supreme Court rules Arizona cannot force
> people to show proof of US citizenship in
> order to register to vote.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/17/supreme-court-arizona-citizenship-proof-law-illegal/

Supreme Court: Arizona law requiring citizenship proof for voters is
illegal
Published June 17, 2013 Associated Press

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot on
their own require would-be voters to prove they are U.S. citizens
before using a federal registration system designed to make signing up
easier.

The justices voted 7-2 to throw out Arizona's voter-approved
requirement that prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in
order to use a registration form produced under the federal "Motor
Voter" voter registration law.

Federal law "precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant
to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,"
Justice Antonia Scalia wrote for the court's majority.

The court was considering the legality of Arizona's requirement that
prospective voters document their U.S. citizenship in order to use a
registration form produced under the federal "motor voter"
registration law. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the
National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which doesn't require such
documentation, trumps Arizona's Proposition 200 passed in 2004.

Arizona appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

"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 and lead counsel for the voters who challenged
Proposition 200.

"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," she said.

The case focuses on Arizona, which has tangled frequently with the
federal government over immigration issues involving the Mexican
border. But it has broader implications because four other states --
Alabama, Georgia, Kansas and Tennessee -- have similar requirements,
and 12 other states are contemplating such legislation.

Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented from the court's
ruling.

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," Thomas
said in his dissent.

Opponents of Arizona's law see it as an attack on vulnerable voter
groups such as minorities, immigrants and the elderly. They say
they've counted more than 31,000 potentially legal voters in Arizona
who easily could have registered before Proposition 200 but were
blocked initially by the law in the 20 months after it passed in 2004.
They say about 20 percent of those thwarted were Latino.

Barbara Arnwine, president and executive director of the Lawyers'
Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, called the decision a victory.
"The court has reaffirmed the essential American right to register to
vote for federal election without the burdens of state voter
suppression measures," she said.

But Arizona officials say they should be able to pass laws to stop
illegal immigrants and other noncitizens from getting on their voting
rolls. The Arizona voting law was part of a package that also denied
some government benefits to illegal immigrants and required Arizonans
to show identification before voting.

The federal "motor voter" law, enacted in 1993 to expand voter
registration, requires states to offer voter registration when a
resident applies for a driver's license or certain benefits. Another
provision of that law -- the one at issue before the court -- requires
states to allow would-be voters to fill out mail-in registration cards
and swear they are citizens under penalty of perjury, but it doesn't
require them to show proof. Under Proposition 200, Arizona officials
require an Arizona driver's license issued after 1996, a U.S. birth
certificate, a passport or other similar document, or the state will
reject the federal registration application form.

While the court was clear in stating that states cannot add additional
identification requirements to the federal forms on their own, it was
also clear that the same actions can be taken by state governments if
they get the approval of the federal government and the federal
courts.

Arizona can ask the federal government to include the extra documents
as a state-specific requirement, Scalia said, and take any decision
made by the government on that request back to court. Other states
have already done so, Scalia said.

The Election Assistance Commission "recently approved a state-specific
instruction for Louisiana requiring applicants who lack a Louisiana
driver's license, ID card or Social Security number to attach
additional documentation to the completed federal form," Scalia said.

The case is 12-71, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc.