Republicans Clash at Supreme Court: Call for Tougher Voting Laws in Arizona

WASHINGTON (CN) — On Friday, the Republican National Committee (RNC) urged the Supreme Court to permit the enforcement of Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship laws for the upcoming presidential election in November.

In collaboration with Republican lawmakers, the RNC is seeking permission for Arizona to dismiss voter registration forms lacking citizenship documentation. This measure would block individuals without proof from voting by mail or casting ballots for president.

Republicans contend that a lower court ruling compelled Arizona to include individuals on voter rolls who did not fulfill the state’s identity and citizenship requirements. In a court brief, the RNC emphasized the importance of safeguarding voter rights against sudden changes to election legislation that could undermine their members’ chances of success.

This request coincides with ongoing Republican claims of noncitizen voting, which they argue leads to voter fraud. Although the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill mandating proof of citizenship for federal elections, its future in the Democratic-controlled Senate remains uncertain.

Notably, federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting. Under Arizona’s legislation, registered voters must verify their citizenship status by submitting documents such as a birth certificate or passport. County recorders are mandated to deregister voters who cannot provide adequate verification.

Following the law’s passage in 2022, several lawsuits were initiated against the state by the Biden administration, Mi Familia Vota, and other voting rights advocates, yet Arizona’s secretary of state did not enforce the law, resulting in delays in judicial proceedings.

Critics argue that the proof-of-citizenship requirements create significant hurdles for voters. A survey indicated that 21.3 million American citizens do not possess the necessary documentation.

Opponents of the law cite the National Voter Registration Act, which they claim prohibits such requirements. In a 2013 ruling, the Supreme Court backed this perspective concerning federal election registrations.

Arizona maintains that its laws are vital for ensuring electoral integrity. A judge ruled in favor of the government, asserting that the proof-of-citizenship requirements were preempted by federal law.

The RNC and several lawmakers then intervened, seeking a definitive ruling on the legality of the provisions. After a three-month bench trial, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton found the laws constitutional and not overly burdensome for voters in state elections, although she did exclude a birthplace requirement from registration forms.

A Ninth Circuit panel briefly reinstated these requirements; however, another appeals panel decided to keep them on hold pending legal challenges, citing the Purcell v. Gonzalez principle against last-minute election procedure changes.

Republicans contend that the Supreme Court’s review is warranted and argue that the district court’s injunction undermines Arizona’s legislative authority regarding voter qualifications and election structure.

The application has been submitted to Justice Elena Kagan, who reviews emergency appeals from the Ninth Circuit. Voting advocacy groups have until August 16 to respond, as the Republicans request a ruling by August 22 to allow counties sufficient time to prepare ballots.