On October 15, the U.S. Supreme Court said it will hear Arizona v InterTribal Council of Arizona, Inc., 11-71. This is the case over whether Arizona can require extra information from newly-registering voters when they use the federal Voter Registration form. Arizona state law says that when an individual uses the federal voter registration form, extra information, mandated only by the state, must be included.
The Ninth Circuit had ruled that when Congress passed the bill for a federal voter registration form in 1993, Congress felt the questions on the federal form are sufficient. The federal form requires applicants to say under penalty of perjury that the individual is a citizen. But Arizona is not satisfied with that and wants copies of naturalization certificates, or drivers license number information or other information concerning birthplace. The case was called Gonzalez v Arizona when it was in the 9th circuit. Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was acting as a visiting Ninth Circuit judge and was part of the original 9th circuit panel that ruled against the state. This is an important case for other election law issues as well, because it tests the “Election Clause”, the part of Article One that says states may write election laws for Congress, but Congress can override them when it wishes.
We know, of course, what this is really about: the anti-immigrant, anti-Hispanic/Latino hysteria that has unfortunately gripped Arizona and its nutwing legislature and governor over the past few years.
Sandra Day O’Connor is a beloved figure in Arizona. No one is held in higher regard. That she would rule against the state while sitting as an acting Ninth Circuit Court judge is telling. We wish she was still on the U.S. Supreme Court. When she was the Republican majority leader in the Arizona State Senate, she performed so far above the clowns of the last decade that it’s terribly sad that there are few politicians of her caliber here today.
She understands the Constitution and she understands American and Arizona history and she understands people. Bless her.
How many ILLEGAL INVADERS have voted, will vote and/or hold public offices in the nearly dead U.S.A. ???
The Constitution happens to have each sovereign State determine who is an Elector in elections for U.S.A. Reps and Senators.
Art. I, Sec. 2 and 17th Amdt.
i.e. the AZ case is one more BRAIN DEAD case — i.e. having the EVIL gerrymander Congress trying to subvert the States out of existance — by one more perversion of the Const via Art. I, Sec. 4.
The 9th Circuit in its opinion (both the 3-judge panel and en banc) refers to the electoral system used in Louisiana as an “open primary” Foster v Love was cited since Congress may override Time, Place, Manner regulations with regard to congressional elections.
BTW, the decision seems to imply that Arizona only need accept the federal form for registration for congressional elections, but could require more stringent proof for voting in State elections.
RICHARD, WHAT STATES WILL AWARD ELECTORAL VOTES BASED ON NATIONAL POPULAR VOTE WINNER THIS YEAR??? HAS THE PUNDITS AND THE PRESS IGNORING A GREAT X FACTOR?