|
|
|
|
NINTH CIRCUIT SPLITS DECISION ON ARIZONA VOTING LAWApril 17, 2012 - For Immediate Release
DENVER, CO. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting en banc, today upheld an October 2010 decision that struck down an Arizona voter-approved ballot initiative requiring proof of citizenship to vote, contrary to arguments by a western, public-interest legal foundation. Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF), with years of experience arguing constitutional cases, advised the en banc panel that the law is constitutional and not preempted by federal law. MSLF earlier had urged the Ninth Circuit to rehear the 2-1 ruling by a Ninth Circuit three-judge panel—which included former Justice O’Connor—that reversed a 2008 ruling by an Arizona district court. The Arizona court, after one and a half years of discovery, a six-day bench trial, and post-trial briefing, upheld the law. The Ninth Circuit, which heard the case in June 2011, held that Proposition 200’s voting requirements did not violate the Voting Rights Act or Equal Protection Clause but were in conflict with the National Voting Rights Act. “In his concurring opinion, Judge Kozinski, who dissented from the panel’s earlier ruling, voted with the majority but argued the federal law could be interpreted for or against Arizona; obviously the U.S. Supreme Court awaits,” said MSLF president William Perry Pendley. In November 2004, by a margin of 56 percent to 44 percent, Arizona voters approved Proposition 200 to address the burden imposed on Arizona citizens by the payment of public benefits to illegal aliens. These benefits are believed, by some, to exceed $1 billion a year, or $700 for each Arizona household. Proposition 200 strengthens enforcement of existing laws related to illegal immigration by requiring all who register to vote or apply for “state” public benefits—excluding emergency medical assistance, non-cash emergency disaster relief, and public health assistance for immunizations and testing/treatment of communicable diseases—to prove citizenship. Proposition 200 creates a verification process to enforce current laws that prohibit state and local governments from providing non-essential public benefits to illegal aliens. This process has been used since 1996 to verify eligibility for federal benefits, but Arizona became the first State to require presentation of a designated identity document at the voting polls. In November 2004, the ACLU and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) contested Proposition 200’s constitutionality in a lawsuit that was dismissed by the Ninth Circuit in August 2005. In May 2006, MALDEF and others challenged Proposition 200’s registration and identification provisions. In October 2006, the Ninth Circuit enjoined those provisions; however, the U.S. Supreme Court subsequently reversed. Mountain States Legal Foundation, founded in 1977, is a nonprofit, public-interest legal foundation dedicated to individual liberty, the right to own and use property, limited and ethical government, and the free enterprise system. Its offices are in suburban Denver, Colorado. Gonzalez v. State of Arizona, No. 08-17094 (9th Cir.) |
|
Mountain States Legal Foundation (MSLF) is a nonprofit,
public interest legal foundation dedicated to individual liberty, the right
to own and use property, limited and ethical government, and economic freedom. It is an Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3) entity
incorporated in the State of Colorado. Csontributions
to Mountain States Legal Foundation are tax deductible. [Mission] [Press
Releases] [Legal Cases] [Legal
Assistance ] |
