The Supreme Court on Thursday put back into effect an Arizona law requiring those registering to vote to provide documentary proof of citizenship, but not for voting for president or for voting by mail .
In a 5-4 vote, the high court allowed limited enforcement of the 2022 law with Republican-appointed justices in the majority. The move means state officials can reject any attempt by a person to register to vote using the state's forms if that person lacks documentary proof of citizenship.
The decision marks a partial victory for the Republican National Committee. The justices allowed one of three provisions of the 2022 Arizona law at issue to be enforced.
However, they left on hold separate provisions that would prevent people without proof of citizenship from voting in presidential elections or by mail if they registered to vote using a federal registration form.
Republican-appointed Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch said they would grant the application in full. One conservative, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, joined the three Democratic-appointed justices in dissent. The court did not explain its reasoning.
Earlier this week, two dozen GOP-led states filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to uphold Arizona's 2022 law, noting that more than 40,000 people have registered to vote in federal elections in Arizona without providing proof of citizenship.
The election-related case, one of many likely to come before Election Day, comes in a state where President Joe Biden beat former President Donald Trump by around 10,000 votes in 2020.
The Democratic National Committee and several voting rights groups have challenged the three provisions of the 2022 law. The case revolves around claims that the changes are unconstitutional and that they violated a consent decree signed by a state official in 2018.
Democrats in the state said the Supreme Court's involvement in this dispute would be "destabilizing" given the close proximity to the November election between Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris.
Recent back-and-forth court rulings over the law have shown just how divisive the measure has been. A panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit halted a district court ruling that blocked the law from taking effect. But a different panel revised the earlier ruling and allowed Arizonans to register to vote in federal races without the proof of citizenship requirement.
The Arizona law, which has yet to be enforced, was a response to a 2013 Supreme Court ruling that held the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 preempts Arizona from requiring citizenship proof for voter registrants applying using a federal form.
At the time, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the act “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself.” Thomas and Alito, two of the six members who form the current 6-3 conservative majority on the court, dissented from Scalia’s decision at the time.
The RNC had asked the Supreme Court to stay the lower court ruling that halted the law by Thursday, which is the state's ballot printing deadline, arguing that the state was authorized to make the voter registration changes.
Despite only receiving the partial win, RNC Chairman Michael Whatley called the high court's decision a "major victory for election integrity that upholds a simple principle: American elections must be decided by American citizens."
"While Democrats have worked to undermine basic election safeguards and make it easier for noncitizens to vote, we have fought tooth and nail to preserve citizenship requirements, see the law enforced, and secure our elections," Whatley said.
The RNC's appeal is still pending at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in the interim. The group has expressed confidence that the other components of the law, documentary proof of citizenship requirements in presidential elections and absentee voting, will eventually be upheld as litigation continues.
The Campaign Legal Center, a left-leaning group that supported halts on the Arizona law, released a statement saying the high court's decision will "cause voter confusion."
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
"Free and fair elections rely on every citizen being able to cast a ballot, and the fight is far from over," said Bruce Spiva, senior vice president of CLC, adding that his group looks forward to appellate court oral arguments on the merits in September.
The oral argument hearing will be held on Sept. 10 at the San Francisco-based appellate court. Lawyers for the RNC have signaled in court filings they plan to appeal to the Supreme Court again if need be.
Local Arizona State
Most Popular
Comments / 0