Both sides are calling a federal district court’s ruling a win, which upheld most of two new Arizona election integrity laws. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton struck down parts of HB 2492, which requires proof of citizenship in order to register to vote, and HB 2243, which requires quarterly reporting of the number of Arizona voters who did not list their citizenship status.
State Senator Jake Hoffman (R-Queen Creek), the primary sponsor of both bills, expressed his disappointment to The Arizona Sun Times. “Bolton’s ruling is potentially the most intellectually dishonest, schizophrenic legal determination in the last half century. Bolton has shown a clear disdain for legislative authority, while simultaneously weaponizing the court against common sense. The idea that a person wouldn’t need to produce documentary proof of citizenship to vote in U.S. elections is lunacy. I can only hope that this case ultimately works its way to the U.S. Supreme Court where there still remains a semblance of sanity thanks to President Trump’s justices and the great Clarence Thomas.”
Bolton, who was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton and who previously struck down most of Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law SB 1070 in 2010, held in her 104-page opinion deciding Mi Familia Vota v. Fontes that the provision of HB 2492 that requires voters to list their place of birth to be presumed as properly registered to vote violated the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (known as the Motor Voter law) because “an individual’s birthplace is not material to determining her eligibility to vote.”
However, the part of the law requiring proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections remains. She reiterated that voters can still register to vote in federal elections without proof of citizenship. Similarly, she struck down a large part of SB 1070 due to it requiring proof of citizenship in federal elections. The state may still require proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections.
Bolton struck down a portion of HB 2243 that allowed voter registration workers to conduct SAVE checks on registrants that they believe “are not United States citizens.” However, she said if registered voters have not provided proof of citizenship, workers may run SAVE checks on them. SAVE is used by the government to check individuals’ immigration status to determine whether they are eligible for benefits.
Bolton found that the laws did not impose an “undue burden” on voters or violate the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. She said the plaintiffs “failed to show that the voting laws were enacted with any discriminatory purpose,” and “Plaintiffs did not show that the Arizona Legislature enacted the Voting Laws because of any impact on minority voters or naturalized citizens.”
The lawsuit was originally filed by both the Department of Justice and seven progressive groups, alleging discrimination against minorities. Arizona is the only state that requires proof of citizenship to vote. Bolton blocked the laws from taking effect during the litigation. Her ruling came three months after a 2-week long bench trial.
Democratic Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, who has fought election integrity efforts, claimed the ruling was a victory. “We applaud the Court for its decisive action in upholding the rights of all Arizona voters,” he said in a statement. “Today’s opinion dismantles a blatant attempt to suppress the votes of Arizona’s diverse electorate. This ruling reaffirms that voter suppression has no place in our democracy, and attempts to disenfranchise citizens are a solution in search of a problem.”
