Supreme Court says Arizona cannot ask for proof of citizenship for federal voter regi
- 0Jun 17, '13 by herring_RN GuideWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states cannot 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. ...
... 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.
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. ...
... 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.
The case is 12-71, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc. ...
- 5Jun 17, '13 by aknottedyarn GuideI cannot imagine too many undocumented workers who would go to vote knowing there was a chance of INS arrest.
Research shows the number of people who commit voter fraud is statistically insignificant.
Arizona has tried to write or re-write federal law a few times and has been stopped repeatedly.
Unfortunately in our country more people want to rent videos than vote.
- 1If even one person who is not a legal citizen or otherwise not legal to vote tries to vote, based on this encouragement, it is too many. Why not let underage "votes" happen too? I fail to see why an insignificant number who try to vote fraudulently, makes this acceptable.
- 2Jun 17, '13 by aknottedyarn GuideArizona’s voter registration form included a requirement to prove citizenship. Since naturalized citizens would have to present their naturalization documents, it means they would not be able to register on line or by mail – unlike natural born citizens. Since federal law prohibits photocopying of naturalization documents, this requirement means that Naturalized citizens would have to register in person. Therefore, the law creates an obstacle especially created for naturalized citizens.
It created an unfair burden for naturalized citizens. Unless all are equal none are equal. A citizen is a citizen.
- 6Jun 17, '13 by Elvish GuideQuote from tntrnThe libertarian in me thinks we should be required to show ID far less than we are. It's ridiculous to have to show Blockbuster, the pharmacist, the doctor, and the lady at the storage unit my driver's license.I disagree with this decision on so many levels I won't bother to even list them. You can't do anything without photo ID in this country, including walking into Blockbuster and renting a movie.....but you can vote! Sad and pathetic.
- 1The argument over the elderly not having birth certificates will go away in time. My dad, born at home in 1927, had a birth certificate. So I think that argument will have no merit within a few years. As far as others not having photo ID, that is a bogus argument also.
Every person who walks into the Birth Center where I worked had to present photo ID and proof of insurance. And those on welfare, or those who claimed not to have anything, all had photo id's.
But hey, let's take the chance that none of those people who are here illegally will try to vote, or worse, be encouraged to vote anyway by some community organizing group.
- 1Jun 17, '13 by herring_RN GuideI think that for the few older people who never had a birth certificate filed there needs to be a less onerous way to get proof of citizenship. Maybe it is easier on like?
Years ago my DH, born in 1927 waited in line for 8 hours on day and 6 the next trying to get a proof of citizenship with school records, the family bible, and such. He was told to get an attorney to help him prove he was born in the U.S.A. because his mother was born in the American Virgin Islands. He told the woman he no longer needs a passport because the farthest he planned to go was to the Virgin Islands. She told him he would need a passport to go to that foreign country!
His sister did hire an attorney. Somehow she was listed as a boy by a doctor who stiched her foot after she stepped on glass. She had to go through a LOT including medical examinations although she had been married to a man more than 40 years and given birth to four babies. She had to prove she wasn't transgender. A DNA test for gender shouldn't be so expensive.... States are still free to use their own voter-registration forms in addition to the federal form, the court said, and Arizona can require registrants to supply proof of citizenship when using the state form. Moreover, Arizona is free to cross-check information registrants supply on the federal form to ensure its accuracy, the court said.
In addition, Justice Scalia added, Arizona can ask the federal Election Assistance Commission to include state-specific requirements to the federal form. ...
Supreme Court Strikes Down Arizona Voting Rules - WSJ.com