Supreme Court Showdown: Republicans Push for Tougher Voting Laws in Arizona

The Republican National Committee on Friday petitioned the Supreme Court to enforce Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship laws for the upcoming presidential election in November.

Joined by Republican legislators, the committee urged the justices to permit Arizona to invalidate voter registration forms lacking citizenship documentation and prevent these individuals from voting by mail or casting presidential votes.

The Republicans contended that the lower court’s decision compelled Arizona to register individuals who had not met the state’s identification and citizenship verification requirements.

“The RNC has an interest in ensuring that its members’ rights as voters are not compromised by last-minute changes to election laws,” the committee stated in a brief to the court. They added that candidates and parties are disadvantaged when their “chances of victory are diminished.”

The request follows Republicans’ unsubstantiated claims of noncitizen voter fraud in U.S. elections. While the U.S. House of Representatives approved a proof-of-citizenship requirement for federal elections, the bill is unlikely to advance in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Federal law currently prohibits noncitizens from voting. Under Arizona’s regulations, already registered voters must present a birth certificate, passport, driver’s license, tribal identification number, or naturalization number to maintain their registration. County recorders are mandated to cancel registrations without verification.

The Biden administration, Mi Familia Vota, and other voter advocacy groups filed a series of lawsuits against the state following the law’s passage in 2022. Arizona’s secretary of state, however, declined to enforce the restrictions, delaying an immediate need for a court decision.

Voter advocacy organizations argue that proof-of-citizenship requirements significantly hinder voters. According to a recent survey, 21.3 million American citizens lack the necessary documents.

Opponents assert that these requirements violate the National Voter Registration Act, which the Supreme Court supported in a 2013 ruling related to federal election registrations.

Arizona applied the law to state-form applicants, citing a vested interest in ensuring election integrity. A judge sided with the government, declaring the proof-of-citizenship mandates were overridden by federal law.

The Republican National Committee and various representatives then sought a conclusive judgment on the law’s legality. Following a three-month bench trial, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton ruled the laws constitutional and not an undue burden on the right to vote for state elections, except for excluding a birthplace requirement for registration.

While a Ninth Circuit panel temporarily reinstated those requirements, another appeals panel later put the provisions on hold pending legal challenges, invoking the principle from Purcell v. Gonzalez against last-minute changes to election protocols.

The Republicans argued the opposite before the Supreme Court, asserting that Purcell supported enforcing the law. “The district court’s injunction is an unprecedented abrogation of the Arizona Legislature’s sovereign authority to determine voter qualifications and election participation,” the committee noted.

The application was submitted to Justice Elena Kagan, who oversees emergency appeals from the Ninth Circuit. Voting advocacy groups were given until Aug. 16 to respond, and Republicans emphasized that any decision must be made by Aug. 22 to provide counties enough time to print ballots.