On July 18, 2022, Free Speech For People joined Campaign Legal Center on an amended complaint challenging Arizona’s anti-voter laws H.B. 2492 and H.B. 2243, which together impose burdensome and unnecessary proof of residency and citizenship requirements on voter registration despite the fact that that voters are already required to attest to citizenship under penalty of perjury, prevent certain voters from voting by mail or voting in the presidential election, and mandate strict voter roll purges and unwarranted investigation of naturalized citizen voters. The amended complaint added new plaintiffs, including Arizona Coalition for Change, The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, and the San Carlos Apache Tribe. 

The Court found in plaintiffs’ favor in several crucial issues in an order on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment on September 13, 2023. In November 2023, the case went to trial on remaining issues. On February 29, 2024, the Court entered a final judgment, agreed upon by plaintiffs  and the defendants. The Court’s rulings and the agreed-upon judgment protect Arizona voters from two laws that subjected Arizona voters to unlawful restrictions on their ability to register to vote in federal elections, to participate in federal elections, and to register without fear of unlawful investigation based on their status as naturalized citizens. 

Three defendant-intervenors—the Republican National Committee, Warren Petersen in his capacity as President of the Arizona State Senate, and Ben Toma in his capacity as the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives—have appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit.

Free Speech For People, in partnership with the law firm of Mayer Brown LLP, is pleased to join the San Carlos Apache Tribe Department of Justice, Campaign Legal Center, and Barton Mendez Soto PLLC on the legal team for this litigation.

Key Facts

Caption Mi Familia Vota v. Petersen
Court U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, on appeal from the Federal District Court of Arizona
Docket No.
24-3188
Status Judgment issued, appeal by intervenor defendants filed.
Plaintiffs Living United for Change in Arizona, League of United Latin American Citizens, Arizona Students’ Association, ADRC Action, The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the San Carlos Apache Tribe, and Arizona Coalition for Change
Defendants Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes
Defendant Intervenors Republican National Committee, Warren Petersen in his capacity as President of the Arizona State Senate, and Ben Toma in his capacity as the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives.

Background

Campaign Legal Center filed an initial lawsuit on behalf of several Arizona public interest organizations challenging Arizona’s  voter suppression law, H.B. 2492. On July 18, 2022, Free Speech For People joined Campaign Legal Center on the lawsuit challenging H.B. 2492 and another voter suppression law H.B. 2243 with an amended complaint.

The documentary proof of residence required by H.B. 2492 is nearly impossible for Native voters to provide. Reservations often lack any residential numbered street address. This is why the amended complaint adds new plaintiffs, including two groups representing Native voters: The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, the San Carlos Apache Tribe. Arizona Coalition for Change also joined as a plaintiff.

After Campaign Legal Center filed the initial lawsuit, Arizona passed another voter suppression bill, H.B. 2243, which requires local election officials to remove voters from registration rolls using outdated and inaccurate data about voters’ residency and citizenship status. This amended complaint adds a challenge to H.B. 2243 and claims that the laws violate the National Voter Registration Act and Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Together with the burdens imposed by H.B. 2492, these two bills will make:

  • voter registration rolls significantly less reliable,
  • result in the wrongful cancellation and removal of already registered Arizona voters,
  • subject naturalized U.S. citizens to criminal investigation and prosecution simply for trying to exercise their freedom to vote,
  • and pose near insurmountable obstacles for many Native voters seeking to register.

These laws are masked as ways to secure our elections, but Arizona’s H.B. 2492 and H.B. 2243 do not make our elections any safer. Instead, these anti-voter laws discriminate against Latino and Native voters in Arizona by making it more difficult for them to exercise their freedom to vote.

The Court found in plaintiffs’ favor on several issues in an order on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment, thereby protecting crucial voting rights for Arizonans. This ruling prevented Arizona from rejecting voter registration forms submitted without documentary proof of citizenship where voters are already required to attest to their citizenship under penalty of perjury, a provision that particularly harms Latino voters. It also invalidated the requirement that voters provide documentary proof of their residence when registering to vote, which significantly burdened Native voters. The Court also determined that Arizona may not carry out voter roll purges within 90 days of an election or block certain voters from voting by mail or voting in the presidential election. Finally, the Court’s summary judgment order held that Arizona may not reject a voter registration of an otherwise eligible voter who provides proof of citizenship merely because they left the citizenship “box” on the form unchecked.

The case went to trial in November 2024, and the Court entered a final judgment on February 29, 2024. That judgment confirms that (1) requiring voters to include place of birth on their voter registration forms violates the Civil Rights Act; (2) a provision that would allow election officials to investigate naturalized citizens without any basis other than that citizen’s naturalized status also violates the Civil Rights Act; and (3) requiring individuals to provide documentary proof of residency when registering to vote in federal elections violates the National Voter Registration Act.

Three defendant-intervenors—the Republican National Committee, Warren Petersen in his capacity as President of the Arizona State Senate, and Ben Toma in his capacity as the Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives—have appealed that decision to the Ninth Circuit.

Free Speech For People, in partnership with the law firm of Mayer Brown LLP, is pleased to join the San Carlos Apache Tribe Department of Justice, Campaign Legal Center, and Barton Mendez Soto PLLC on the legal team for this litigation.

Major Case Developments and Documents

 

Photo by Johnny Silvercloud / Shutterstock.com