Arizona Supreme Court rules 98K voters impacted by MVD error can vote full ballot
Posted on 09/21/2024
PHOENIX (AZFamily/AP) — The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the nearly 98,000 voters whose citizenship documents hadn’t been confirmed can cast their full ballots in state and local races in the upcoming November election.
The ruling contended that Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer and other county recorders do not have the authority to change voter registration statuses to federal-only ballots because those voters registered long ago.
“We are unwilling on these facts to disenfranchise voters en masse from participating in state contests,” Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer stated in the ruling. “Doing so is not authorized by state law and would violate principles of due process.”
The high court acknowledged that while county recorders are required to verify proof of citizenship, in this case, there is no evidence to suggest the impacted voters are not U.S. citizens.
As Timmer explained, “Fontes and Richer acknowledge that ‘[i]t is possible that Affected Voters have, in fact, provided satisfactory evidence of DPOC [documentary proof of citizenship]’”
“This Court has also accepted original special action jurisdiction over election matters in which there is a need for immediate relief based on rapidly approaching election deadlines and where the key facts are not in dispute,” Timmer wrote in explaining the ruling.
“Today marks a significant victory for those whose fundamental right to vote was under scrutiny. The court faced a stark choice: to allow voters to participate in just a few federal races on a limited ballot, or to make their voices heard across hundreds of decisions on a full ballot that includes a variety of local and state offices,” stated Fontes. “We deeply appreciate the Arizona Supreme Court for their prompt and just resolution.”
Meanwhile, Richer, a Republican, expressed his gratitude to the court, saying, in part, “Thank you Arizona Supreme Court for your extremely quick and professional review of this matter.”
The issue centered around a 2004 Arizona law that requires residents to provide documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) to register as “full-ballot voters,” allowing them to vote in all federal, state and local races. Those who don’t provide proof of citizenship can only register to vote in federal races.
A problem had been discovered in how duplicate driver’s licenses are issued, and thus, certain voters who were issued a license before Oct. 1, 1996, may not have citizenship records on file.
Fontes and Richer had disagreed on what status the voters should hold. Richer asked the high court to weigh in.
The swing state is unique in that it distinguishes between voters who can participate only in federal elections and those who can vote in federal, state and local elections. Eligibility for the latter classification requires submission of proof of citizenship.
See a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it.
Do you have a photo or video of a breaking news story? Send it to us here with a brief description.
The ruling contended that Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer and other county recorders do not have the authority to change voter registration statuses to federal-only ballots because those voters registered long ago.
“We are unwilling on these facts to disenfranchise voters en masse from participating in state contests,” Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer stated in the ruling. “Doing so is not authorized by state law and would violate principles of due process.”
The high court acknowledged that while county recorders are required to verify proof of citizenship, in this case, there is no evidence to suggest the impacted voters are not U.S. citizens.
As Timmer explained, “Fontes and Richer acknowledge that ‘[i]t is possible that Affected Voters have, in fact, provided satisfactory evidence of DPOC [documentary proof of citizenship]’”
“This Court has also accepted original special action jurisdiction over election matters in which there is a need for immediate relief based on rapidly approaching election deadlines and where the key facts are not in dispute,” Timmer wrote in explaining the ruling.
“Today marks a significant victory for those whose fundamental right to vote was under scrutiny. The court faced a stark choice: to allow voters to participate in just a few federal races on a limited ballot, or to make their voices heard across hundreds of decisions on a full ballot that includes a variety of local and state offices,” stated Fontes. “We deeply appreciate the Arizona Supreme Court for their prompt and just resolution.”
Meanwhile, Richer, a Republican, expressed his gratitude to the court, saying, in part, “Thank you Arizona Supreme Court for your extremely quick and professional review of this matter.”
The issue centered around a 2004 Arizona law that requires residents to provide documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) to register as “full-ballot voters,” allowing them to vote in all federal, state and local races. Those who don’t provide proof of citizenship can only register to vote in federal races.
A problem had been discovered in how duplicate driver’s licenses are issued, and thus, certain voters who were issued a license before Oct. 1, 1996, may not have citizenship records on file.
Fontes and Richer had disagreed on what status the voters should hold. Richer asked the high court to weigh in.
The swing state is unique in that it distinguishes between voters who can participate only in federal elections and those who can vote in federal, state and local elections. Eligibility for the latter classification requires submission of proof of citizenship.
See a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it.
Do you have a photo or video of a breaking news story? Send it to us here with a brief description.
Comments( 0 )
0 0 6
0 0 6
0 0 5
0 0 8