Arizona Voting Battle
Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Arizona Voting Rules on Citizenship and Voter Rolls
Key Points
The Court's recent decision in Watson v. RNC upheld Mississippi's rule allowing late-arriving ballots to be counted if postmarked by Election Day, providing a real-world backdrop for challenges to state election-integrity provisions like Arizona's citizenship-proof requirement.
In 2024, the Supreme Court allowed Virginia to continue purging voter rolls shortly before an election, illustrating ongoing acceptance of pre-election purge practices in some states.
A 2018 consent decree between Arizona's secretary of state and Maricopa County recorder remains a key backdrop to the case, potentially curtailing how citizenship verification can be enforced on state registration forms.
Arizona's federal registration option allows voters to register without citizenship proof but as 'federal-only' voters, who are not eligible to vote in presidential elections; about 19,000 Arizonans were on this status as of July 2023.
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a major voting rights case out of Arizona, Washington Examiner reported. The case, *RNC v. Mi Familia Vota*, centers on two state laws: one requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote on the state form, and another allowing officials to purge suspected noncitizens from voter rolls.
The stakes are high. Arizona has more than 41,000 "federal-only" voters — people who registered without citizenship proof and can vote in federal races but not state ones, according to Arizona Secretary of State data. President Biden won Arizona in 2020 by just 10,457 votes, per the Federal Election Commission.
Two Arizona Laws At the Heart of the Fight
Arizona passed two laws in 2022. The first, HB 2492, requires voters to show proof of citizenship — like a passport or birth certificate — to vote in presidential or mail-in federal elections. The second, HB 2243, tells county recorders to cancel registrations if they get word that a voter is not a citizen. Governor Doug Ducey signed both laws.
A federal judge blocked key parts of these laws in February 2024, saying they violated the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) — the 1993 federal law that sets rules for how states must handle voter registration. The NVRA requires states to accept the federal registration form, which does not ask for proof of citizenship. Then, in August 2024, the Supreme Court stepped in 5-4 and allowed the state-form citizenship requirement to take effect while the case played out, Freedom 96.9 reported.
A 2013 Ruling and a 2018 Deal Still Shape the Case
This is not Arizona's first fight over citizenship and voting. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled in *Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona* that Arizona had to accept the federal registration form, even without citizenship proof. Arizona's new laws tried to get around that ruling by targeting presidential races specifically — an angle the Court has not fully addressed yet.
A 2018 consent decree — a legal settlement — also hangs over the case. Arizona agreed in that deal not to require citizenship proof for federal elections. The Republican National Committee now argues that agreement cannot stop the state legislature from passing new laws. RNC Chairman Michael Whatley said: "Only Americans should decide American elections." Opponents push back hard. Danielle Lang of the Campaign Legal Center warned Arizona is "creating a maze that primarily traps low-income and elderly voters" who may not have easy access to a birth certificate or passport, per The New York Times.
41,000 Voters Caught in a Two-Tier System
Right now, Arizona runs what officials call a "bifurcated" system — two separate voter rolls. People who register using the state form must show citizenship proof. People who use the federal form do not, but they can only vote in federal races, not state or local ones. As of late 2024, more than 41,663 Arizonans were stuck on the federal-only list, according to Arizona Secretary of State data.
The groups most likely to be affected are naturalized citizens who may not have documents on hand, students voting away from home, and Native Americans whose tribal birth records may not meet state standards. Mi Familia Vota, a Latino voter group challenging the laws, said: "These laws are a direct attack on the voting power of our community, creating unnecessary hurdles for naturalized citizens." In 2024, roughly 210,000 Arizona voters were also caught up in a separate administrative glitch tied to driver's license data, The Guardian reported, before the Arizona Supreme Court cleared them to vote.
What a Ruling Could Mean for Elections Nationwide
If the Supreme Court sides with the RNC, Arizona would become the first state to successfully require citizenship proof for presidential races. That could push other Republican-led states to pass similar laws before the 2028 election, according to Politico. The case also asks the Court to clarify the NVRA's "quiet period" rule, which bars most voter roll purges within 90 days of a federal election. A broader ruling could let states do targeted purges much closer to Election Day.
The case fits a wider pattern. In 2024, the Supreme Court let Virginia continue purging suspected noncitizens from voter rolls just before an election. Magnolia Tribune also noted the Court recently ruled against the RNC in a separate Mississippi case over late-arriving absentee ballots. Oral arguments in *RNC v. Mi Familia Vota* are expected this fall, with a decision likely after the midterms.
Sentiment
Mostly NegativePublishers
48
Articles
528
Reach
576
