SCOTUS on AZ voting:

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (4)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 2

msn.com - Supreme court grants partial victory to rnc on arizona voter registration fight

TThe 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.

The decision marks a partial win for the Republican National Committee's bid to halt a lower court ruling that would have forced Arizona to allow people to register to vote without having to show proof of citizenship.

Not sure this ruling makes much sense.

The actual order:

documentcloud.org - Scotus order

(ORDER LIST: 603 U.S.) THURSDAY, AUGUST 22, 2024 ORDER IN PENDING CASE 24A164 REPUBLICAN NAT. COMM., ET AL. V. MI FAMILIA VOTA, ET AL. The application for stay presented to Justice Kagan and by her referred to the Court is granted in part and denied in part. The district court’s May 2, 2024 judgment is stayed only to the extent it enjoins enforcement of Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 16-121.01(C) (2023) pending disposition of the appeals in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if any such writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court. The application is denied as to Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 16-121.01(E) and 16-127(A). Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, and Justice Gorsuch would grant the application in full. Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, Justice Barrett, and Justice Jackson would deny the application in full.

In this case CNN did a reasonable job of explaining it:
cnn.com - Supreme court arizona proof of citizenship law

The Supreme Court left in place a lower court’s ruling that barred enforcement of the law that required voters to document their US citizenship to vote in this year’s presidential election, but it allowed the state to enforce a requirement that would-be voters document their citizenship before registering to vote in state and local elections.

I'm not sure this is really a distinction with a difference...so you can be an illegal, roll into a voter registration agency and register, but only for federal elections?

https://azsos.gov/elections/voters
A person who submits valid proof of citizenship with their voter registration form (and is otherwise an eligible registrant) is entitled to vote in all federal, state, and local elections in which they are eligible. A.R.S. § 16-101.

A registrant who attests to being a citizen but fails to provide proof of citizenship and whose citizenship is not otherwise verified will be eligible to vote only in federal elections (known as being a "federal only" voter).

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post Share: X · FacebookFB · LinkedInLI · WhatsAppWApp · Email

Members reply directly to Dope1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »

This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:

It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025

G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026

Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026

HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025

Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (4)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.