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 story you just read is available to read for free because thousands of listeners and readers like you generously support our nonprofit newsroom. Every day, the reporters and producers at The World are hard at work bringing you human-centered news from across the globe. But we can’t do it without you: We need your support to ensure we can continue this work for another year.
When you make a gift of $10 or more a month, we’ll invite you to a virtual behind-the-scenes tour of our newsroom to thank you for being with The World.