Phoenix, Arizona – A federal judge has ruled that a new voting law in Arizona, which requires voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship, is not discriminatory. U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton concluded that the state legislators did not discriminate when they adopted the voting laws and that the state has a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud, according to The Associated Press.
In her ruling, Judge Bolton stated that the court found Arizona’s interests in preventing non-citizens from voting and promoting public confidence in elections outweighed any burden that voters may face when providing proof of citizenship. However, she did find that part of the law, which mandates individuals to include their place of birth when using a state registration form, violated certain provisions of the Civil Rights Act and the National Voter Registration Act. This provision could lead to investigations solely targeting naturalized citizens.
The new voting law, House Bill 2492, imposed stricter voting requirements in Arizona, where proof of citizenship is already required for state elections. It now mandates election workers to verify the documentation of citizenship for voters in federal elections. Under this law, individuals without official proof of citizenship, such as a passport or driver’s license, are prohibited from voting and registering. The Attorney General’s Office is also required to investigate all cases in which citizens attempted to vote or register without proper documentation.
The Justice Department, the Democratic National Committee, and voting groups had challenged the new law, arguing that it was racially discriminatory. However, Judge Bolton maintained that the lawmakers had not shown any evidence of intention to suppress minority voter registration.
Arizona, a swing state that played a pivotal role in President Biden’s 2020 election victory, has witnessed closely contested elections in recent years, leading to significant political controversy. Despite this, Judge Bolton emphasized that the new voting laws do not unduly burden the right to vote or violate the equal protection and due process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. She further stated that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the laws were created with discriminatory purposes.
It is important to note that Arizona has a history of voting discrimination, including literacy tests that targeted Native American and Latino voters, as well as voter roll purges that disproportionately affected minority communities. However, in this case, Judge Bolton’s ruling emphasized the lack of evidence linking the new voting laws to discriminatory intentions.
This ruling has significant implications for voting rights in Arizona, as it upholds the legality of the state’s stricter voting requirements. Critics argue that these requirements can disproportionately impact marginalized communities and suppress minority voter turnout. However, this decision emphasizes the balance between preventing voter fraud and maintaining public confidence in elections.