Arizona Lawmakers Team Up with 20 States to Defend Voter ID Law in Federal Court

By Jonathan Eberle |

Arizona Senate President Warren Petersen announced on Wednesday that Arizona has joined a coalition consisting of 20 states in support of Idaho’s voter ID law. This law prohibits the use of student IDs for voter registration and ballot casting. The law is currently under appeal in federal court.

Leading the coalition alongside Montana, Arizona filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit regarding the case of March for Our Lives Idaho v. Phil McGrane. The brief defends Idaho’s right to set its own voter identification rules under U.S. constitutional provisions.

Enacted in 2023, the Idaho law aims to enhance election security by limiting acceptable voter identification forms. Under this legislation, student IDs from both high schools and colleges are deemed invalid. This prompted a lawsuit from advocacy groups, including March for Our Lives, which argued that the law disproportionately affects young voters. While a lower court dismissed the case, it has now advanced to appeal.

The coalition’s legal brief asserts that there’s no evidence to support claims that the law violates the 26th Amendment, which prohibits age-based voting discrimination. The states argue that the law does not specifically target young voters and that legislatures possess the constitutional authority to prevent election fraud proactively.

“Every state has an absolute right to implement voter ID laws through its legislature,” Petersen stated. “Arizona has been at the forefront of ensuring election integrity through such requirements. Prevention is better than prosecution.”

Petersen also noted the importance of taking preventative measures against fraud rather than waiting for incidents to occur. He praised Idaho’s method and reiterated Arizona’s commitment to strict election standards.

Voter ID laws remain a contentious issue nationwide. Proponents argue they safeguard election integrity, while opponents contend they may disenfranchise young and marginalized voters. Legal disputes continue to examine the extent to which states can enforce identification rules without infringing on federal protections.

The Ninth Circuit’s forthcoming decision on the Idaho case may set a precedent for other states with similar laws or those considering tightening voter ID measures. A date for the oral arguments in the appeal has yet to be announced.