Court Rules States Can Make Voters Prove Citizenship
Election commission can’t stop voter ID laws
By Stephen Dinan
WashingtonTimes.com
A U.S. District Court judge ruled Wednesday that
Arizona and Kansas can require anyone registering to
vote to prove their citizenship and the federal
Election Assistance Commission cannot block them.
The ruling is a boost for states’ rights and marks a
setback for President Obama and other liberals who
fought stiffer voter ID checks with an argument that
they reduce voter turnout.
“This is a huge victory for me, personally, for the
states of Kansas and Arizona, and for the whole
cause of states’ rights,” said Kansas Secretary of
State Kris W. Kobach, who led the challenge. “We’ve
seen so many defeats recently in areas where the
federal
government has been encroaching on states’
authorities, and this time the good guys won.”
In his ruling, Judge Eric F. Melgren said the
EAC, which Congress created after the 2000 Florida
voting fiasco, must accede to states’ requests for
people to provide proof of citizenship when they
register to vote.
The judge said the Constitution gives states the
power to determine voter qualifications, and if
states want to insist on proof of citizenship, the
election commission cannot overrule them.
“The EAC’s nondiscretionary duty is to perform the
ministerial function of updating the instructions to
reflect each state’s laws,” Judge Melgren ruled in a
decision out of Kansas. “The court orders the EAC to
add the language requested by Arizona and Kansas to
the state-specific instructions of the federal mail
voter registration form immediately.”
A spokesman for the EAC said the commission was
reviewing the decision. The Justice Department,
which argued the case before Judge Melgren, didn’t
return a message seeking comment.
The ruling comes at a time when both Democrats and
Republicans are paying increasing interest to the
rules governing campaigns and voting. With the
country ideologically split, each side is looking
for an advantage at the ballot box.
Democrats say identification checks could
prevent some eligible voters from casting
ballots. Republicans generally argue for stiffer
checks to prevent fraud.
Kansas and Arizona enacted requirements that voters
prove their citizenship when they register. State
registration forms were changed to add the
requirement.
But the federal government, which also distributes
voter registration forms in states under the 1993
National Voter Registration Act, or motor-voter law,
refused to add the requirement.
Arizona then said it would refuse to process federal
forms and ended up in court. Last year, in a case
known as Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona,
the Supreme Court ruled that Arizona couldn’t reject
the federal forms.
But the Supreme Court ruling also hinted that if
states asked the EAC to include proof of citizenship
on forms distributed within their borders, the
commission couldn’t refuse.
Arizona and Kansas requested that the EAC change the
forms distributed in those states, but the
commission refused.
Judge Melgren said he saw clear signs in last year’s
Supreme Court ruling that the justices intended for
the EAC to follow the wishes of the states.
“On one hand, the ITCA decision acknowledges the
broad scope of Congress’ power under the Elections
Clause, which includes the authority of the NVRA to
preempt state law regarding voter registration,” the
judge wrote. “But the ITCA opinion also emphasizes
the states’ exclusive constitutional authority to
set voter qualifications — which Congress may not
preempt — and appears to tie that authority with the
power of the states to enforce their
qualifications.”
Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett said the
ruling will
help clean up voter rolls. About 2,000 people
have submitted federal forms in the state but
haven’t proved their citizenship, he said.
“With this filing and with this ruling, we have
accomplished what we felt was the desire of Arizona
voters all along,” Mr. Bennett said.
Wednesday’s ruling was focused on election law, but
it comes in the middle of a thorny national debate
about U.S. immigration laws. A number of states have
pushed for stricter enforcement from the Obama
administration and the right to help enforce federal
immigration principles.
Mr. Kobach has been at the forefront of those
efforts.