Lyle Denniston (SCOTUSBlog)
I spoke with KPCC’s Take Two about the decision and also to NPR and Slate (links to come).
Earlier I linked to my piece at The Daily Beast and Marty Lederman’s important post from SCOTUSBlog.
Below the fold I’ve added some press quotes I’ve received on the case via email. MORE TO COME
CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra said, “Today’s decision is a victory for the federal government’s authority to regulate federal elections and protect the right to vote.”
CAC Civil Rights Director David Gans said, “The Court affirmed Congress’ decision to use a single federal form to help streamline the voter registration process, and prevent states like Arizona from denying the right of citizens to register to vote in federal elections. At a time when states are engaged in voter suppression efforts, today’s opinion is an important reaffirmation that the text and history of the Elections Clause give the federal government broad power to preempt state law in order to protect the right to vote in federal elections.”
CAC President Doug Kendall added, “As CAC’s brief urged, the Court held that the only purpose of the Elections Clause is to displace state laws, and therefore Congress should be presumed to have displaced states when it acts. The Court got the Constitution’s text and history right in its ruling today.”
The Brennan Center for Justice released the following statement from Democracy Program Director Wendy Weiser:
“Voters scored a huge victory today. We applaud the Supreme Court for confirming Congress’s power to protect the right to vote in federal elections. Congress recognized that voter registration must be made more accessible when it passed the National Voter Registration Act, and the Court also affirmed that today. But more work remains to be done. In 2012, dozens of states passed laws making it harder to vote, and more voting restrictions have been introduced this year. The Supreme Court is still considering a challenge to the Voting Rights Act, one of our nation’s key voting protections. These threats affect real people. We will continue to work with Congress and state legislators to further upgrade and modernize our voting system.”
At issue in the case was an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled that Arizona’s law violates the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, commonly known as Motor Voter. The Supreme Court’s decision today upheld that lower court ruling.
SIGNIFICANT VICTORY FOR VOTERS
IN SUPREME COURT DECISION
Arizona v. ITCA Decision Protects Voter Registration Process from Political Manipulation
Washington, D.C. – “Today’s Supreme Court decision in the case Arizona v. ITCA, Inc. is a strong decision protecting voters,” said Elisabeth MacNamara, President of the League of Women Voters of the U.S.
“The decision is a strong endorsement of Congress’ power under the Elections Clause. In this case, Arizona overstepped by imposing restrictions on the voter registration process,” said MacNamara.
“State restrictions lost: Voters won today,” said MacNamara.
Today, the Supreme Court released its decision in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (No. 12-71), striking down an Arizona law that created unnecessary barriers to voter registration in violation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Demos served as co-counsel to a group of community voter registration organizations, including Rock the Vote, the NAACP, Voto Latino, and others, who filed an amicus brief in the case urging the Court to strike down Arizona’s unnecessarily restrictive law.
In response to today’s decision, Brenda Wright, Vice President for Legal Strategies at Demos, released the following statement:
“Voter registration drives are quintessentially American—critical for engaging citizens in our democracy and closing the voting gap between rich and poor, old and young, and whites and communities of color. Today’s decision strikes down an Arizona law that would have made community voter registration drives expensive and impractical.
“Arizona’s Prop. 200 prevented many eligible citizens from registering to vote unless they were carrying with them specific documents, even when applicants attested to their citizenship under oath. Today’s decision respects Congress’s understanding that most citizens don’t walk around with their birth certificates in their pockets, and even the most dedicated volunteer isn’t going to drag around a photocopier.”
“The Court’s 7-2 ruling holds that Arizona’s law cannot stand because it directly conflicts with the federal National Voter Registration Act, which streamlines the registration process and prohibits unnecessary obstacles to voter registration. This is an important victory, as a contrary decision would have greatly undermined the effectiveness of the NVRA.
“The Court’s decision blocking the Arizona law is particularly important because of the real-world negative impact of Arizona’s extreme documentation requirements. Community voter registration drives have helped register millions of new eligible voters — including often marginalized low-income individuals, youth and people of color — proving to be an indispensable tool for ensuring that all Americans have an equal opportunity and an equal voice in the policies that affect their lives. But as Demos’ amicus brief explained, many eligible citizens do not possess the narrow forms of documentation required by the law and, of those who do, many do not carry such documents with them. In attempting to limit, rather than expand community registration efforts, Arizona’s Prop. 200 effectively suppressed the vote of these underrepresented communities, in direct conflict with the language and purpose of the NVRA.
“It is particularly fitting that this important decision affirming the protections offered by the NVRA comes almost exactly 20 years after the NVRA was signed into law. As noted in a recent Demos report on the impact of the NVRA:
Recognizing that the voter registration process remained a major obstacle to voting, Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) in 1993 in a deliberate attempt to increase voter participation. Fundamentally, the NVRA was designed to streamline and facilitate the process of voter registration and provide uniform registration procedures for federal elections in order to end many of the confusing, and often obstructive, laws affecting voter registration across states and localities. In particular, the NVRA set the first ever national standards for mail-in voter registration, required states to provide registration at public agencies, outlawed the purging of voters solely for non-voting, and established the nation’s first federal standards for voter list maintenance and the first national voter registration application.
Since its adoption twenty years ago, the NVRA has successfully registered millions of eligible voters and led to important increases in voter registration among lower-income Americans.
“While today’s decision protects the ability of community voter registration groups to help eligible Arizona citizens register to vote, we still have a lot of work to do to ensure the right to vote remains free, fair, and accessible to all. We must remain vigilant to root out efforts that would prevent eligible Americans from voting. Other states should take heed of today’s decision and reject the kinds of efforts to suppress voting that have been proposed all too frequently across the country in recent years.”
NAACP Pleased with SCOTUS Ruling Regarding the National Voting Rights Act
In a 7-2 split, SCOTUS Upheld the NVRA in the Arizona v. ITCA Decision
(WASHINGTON)— Today, the NAACP released the following statement in response to the Supreme Court ruling that Arizona’s proof of citizenship requirement is preempted by the federal law requiring states use the federal voter registration form:
“State government should encourage voting, not discourage it,” stated NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Todd Jealous. “The Supreme Court made the right decision to strike down Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship law. We need to find innovative ways to make voting easier and more accessible for Americans, rather than coming up with new ways to suppress it.”
“Any victory for the National Voting Rights Act is a victory for our voters,” said Jotaka Eaddy, Senior Director, Voting Rights. “Today’s decision reaffirms the importance of the National Voting Rights Act. It is a victory for voters and our Democracy.”
“Arizona wrongfully rejected thousands of voter registration applications,” said MacNamara. “The Court ruled that this was inconsistent with the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).”
“The Court’s ITCA decision safeguards the voter registration process from political manipulation and will help block attempts in the states to restrict the right to vote,” MacNamara said.
“In its decision, the Court also recognized the importance of interstate voter registration drives like those conducted by the League of Women Voters.”
Project Vote:
The National Voter Registration Act Trumps Restrictive Arizona Voting Law
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its ruling in the case of Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., a lawsuit challenging 1993’s National Voter Registration Act. Project Vote Executive Director Michael Slater issued the following statement on the positive ruling:
“The NVRA was enacted in 1993 to make voter registration simpler and more accessible. As part of the effort to encourage voter registration and empower voter registration drives, the NVRA created a simple, uniform federal form with which all Americans could register to vote. Voter registration rates have markedly improved over the last 20 years, and most Americans now find registration to be a simple process.
In 2004, Arizona passed its controversial Proposition 200, requiring that people registering to vote with the federal registration form also submit documentary proof of citizenship. This new requirement stymied community based voter registration drives and created unreasonable hurdles for eligible Americans who wanted to register. Tens of thousands of voters were affected by this requirement, and voter registrations from eligible Americans were rejected.
Voting rights advocates, including Project Vote, filed suit arguing that this requirement violates the NVRA. Today, in a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court properly ruled that the NVRA preempts state rules regarding the voter registration form.
“[T]he Federal Form guarantees that a simple means of registering to vote in federal elections will be available,” wrote Justice Scalia in the majority opinion.
This decision is a strong affirmation of the NVRA, but also likely sets up further litigation about voter registration. Now is the time to do even more to draw on the provisions of the NVRA to promote participation in U.S. elections. Project Vote will continue to fight against unnecessary hurdles to registration and voting.
Project Vote is proud to have played a role in this important case upholding the NVRA, and we are gratified by this ruling that reaffirms the authority of this vital federal law.”