On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled against Arizona state’s Proposition 200–a law that required would-be voters to indicate proof of citizenship before being eligible to vote. Arizona sate legislators and Attorney General Tom Horne defended such procedures as measures to counteract voter fraud.
The Supreme Court uses federal preemption, or the Constitution’s supremacy clause, to determine the manner in which federal laws trump state laws when the two are in perceived contention. The Supreme Court ruling indicates that Arizona state legislators have in fact overstepped their judicial boundaries.
The Court cited the federally prepared voter registration form as sufficient evidence of “proof of citizenship,” requiring no other proof by the state in determining voter eligibility.
Kareem Crayton, University of North Carolina law professor, weighs in on what this ruling really means
The article you just read is free because dedicated readers and listeners like you chose to support our nonprofit newsroom. Our team works tirelessly to ensure you hear the latest in international, human-centered reporting every weekday. But our work would not be possible without you. We need your help.
Make a gift today to help us reach our $25,000 goal and keep The World going strong. Every gift will get us one step closer.