7-2, with Scalia voting with the majority and Thomas and Alito dissenting. The court determined that the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which requires ID at the polls (but no proof of citizenship) trumps Arizona’s law.

This has become especially important considering the rush to amnesty and the ability of foreigners to get US driver licenses. Of course, most of our laws, if not all, proceed with the presumption that they’re applied to American citizens. Scalia’s agreement was based on the issue of a state not being able to change the requirement of an existing federal form.

Via Reuters

The Supreme Court on Monday struck down an Arizona state law that requires people registering to vote in federal elections to show proof of citizenship.

In a 7-2 vote, the court said the voter registration provision of the 2004 state law, known as Proposition 200, was trumped by a federal law, the 1993 National Voter Registration Act.

The federal law requires prospective voters to provide one of several possible forms of identification, such as a driver’s license or a passport, but no proof of citizenship is needed. Would-be voters simply sign a statement saying they are citizens.

In the majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia said the state law was preempted by language in the federal statute saying that states must “accept and use” a federal registration form.

The state law ordered officials to reject the form if there was no accompanying proof of citizenship.

Scalia noted: Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a federal form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court’s majority.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
5 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. TX Soldier254 says:

    Yep, 7-2 instead of 7-1 looks about right.
    Senator’s Reid and McCain should be thrilled.

  2. Dave says:

    What the hell? Now the House has to cave to make the liberal coup complete. How do y’all like it? You say hello and I say goodbye.

  3. Maynard says:

    I’d be okay with voting on the honor system if we were likewise allowed to pay taxes on the honor system.

    But aside from concerns of elections being decided by foreign nationals, elections will be dysfunctional when the half the people that pay no taxes are in a position to raise taxes of the half that carry the entire load.

    Last week Secy. Kerry went to Egypt and handed another billion dollars plus to the Muslim Brotherhood. In the mind of most voters, everything the government does is an abstraction, having nothing to do with real life. If people would read these stories and make the connection — Hey, that man just reached into my pocket and took out $5 and gave it to a bunch of maniacs on the far side of the world — then we’d all have incentive to fix things. Without that feedback, too many voters shrug and watch the ship go down and don’t know why it’s sinking.

  4. dennisl59 says:

    The reference from our favorite online encyclopedia shows that “The Motor Voter’ Act was ‘spearheaded’ by none other than Cloward-Piven(Surprise~!)


    posted 6/17 425pm Texas[Born In The USA]Time

  5. ancientwrrior says:

    What we have dear people, is the illusion of freedom and control. When the will of tens of thousands/millions of people can be overturned by a guy/gal in a black robe from Hhhaaved, well you know who is really in control, and it isn’t us. After all, what THEY say, trumps what what we want. 🙁

You must be logged in to post a comment.