The United States Supreme Court has reaffirmed that non-citizens cannot participate in U.S. federal, state, or local elections.
At a Glance
- The Supreme Court rejected a Republican effort to block over 41,000 Arizona voters from casting ballots for president.
- The court allowed partial enforcement of regulations requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration.
- The decision was made in a 5-4 order, with conservative justices favoring full enforcement and liberal justices opposing it.
- The legal battle over voter registration restrictions will continue in lower courts.
- The measures were enacted in Arizona in 2022 following Biden’s narrow victory in 2020.
Supreme Court’s Decision on Non-Citizen Voting
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that non-citizens do not have the right to vote in federal, state, or local elections. This landmark decision reinforces existing legislation that limits voting rights strictly to U.S. citizens, underscoring the vital role of citizenship in maintaining the integrity of the democratic process. By confirming that non-citizens, including undocumented immigrants, cannot vote, the court aims to protect electoral results from undue influence.
The Supreme Court’s decision comes after a legal challenge to Arizona’s 2022 measures requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration. The ruling partly allowed the enforcement of these requirements, while rejecting a Republican effort to block over 41,000 voters from casting ballots in the presidential election. The 5-4 decision saw conservative justices backing full enforcement, while liberal justices opposed it.
Congressional Democrats insist that the SAVE Act—which requires proof of citizenship to establish eligibility to vote in federal elections—is unnecessary because federal law (18 USC § 611) already prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections.
Those making this…
— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) May 10, 2024
Details of the Arizona Law
Arizona’s 2022 law introduced significant changes to voter registration, following President Biden’s narrow victory in the state in 2020. The measures, passed along party lines and signed by Republican Governor Doug Ducey, divided voters into two classes: those who could vote in all races and those restricted to federal elections without proof of citizenship. This has led to ongoing legal battles, with the lower courts blocking some aspects of the law, including requirements for proof of citizenship when voting in presidential elections or by mail.
Despite the partial approval of the proof of citizenship regulations, the ruling does not affect already registered voters and is not expected to impact the upcoming general election significantly. The decision also highlights that federal law requires voters to swear they are U.S. citizens but does not demand proof of citizenship for federal elections.
Reactions and Ongoing Legal Battles
The ruling has drawn mixed reactions. Proponents argue that the measures prevent voter fraud, despite no evidence of non-citizens voting illegally. Notable supporters, including Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach and other Republican attorneys general, backed the restrictions. Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma and Senate President Warren Petersen also supported the court’s decision. On the other hand, voting rights groups and the Biden administration opposed the Arizona laws, arguing they create barriers to voting.
“American elections must be decided by American citizens.”
As the legal process continues in the lower courts, the controversy surrounding voter registration and proof of citizenship requirements remains unresolved. The Supreme Court’s ruling has revived the requirement for proof of citizenship for voter registration in Arizona but rejected the provision for federal registration forms, ensuring the ongoing debate over election integrity and voter access.
