It took less than a day for opponents to file multiple court challenges to a new Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship to vote, a measure almost identical to one rejected by the Supreme Court in 2013.
The sponsor of HB 2492 insisted the measure is on “sound legal footing,” and all but dared opponents to test it in court. They did just that, with no fewer than five groups filing lawsuits Thursday in U.S. District Court, charging the law imposes “arbitrary and discriminatory burdens on eligible Arizona voters.”
People are also reading… “HB 2492 is an incredibly well-crafted piece of legislation that is on sound legal footing and broadly supported by voters of all political parties,” said Rep. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, in a prepared statement. “I am confident that should Democrats challenge HB 2492 in court it will only serve to further reinforce its clear constitutionality.”
That was echoed by E.J. Dionne, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, who said the new law “on its face … may run afoul of a Supreme Court decision back in 2013 on state efforts to impose various citizenship requirements.” But Dionne, the author of “100% Democracy: The Case for Universal Voting,” also noted that the court is significantly more conservative now than the one that ruled in the previous case.
“HB 2492 was adopted in explicit defiance of federal law and the United States Constitution,” said the second suit, filed by the Campaign Legal Center. “After nonpartisan legal staff advised the Arizona Legislature that the law likely violates federal law, one of the bill’s proponents expressly acknowledged that defiance is a purpose of HB 2492.”
But Ducey said in his transmittal letter to Hobbs that the bill is needed to address the growing number of voters who have not had to prove their citizenship, which he said has grown from 21 in 2014, when the federal form was first used in Arizona, to 13,042 today in Maricopa County alone. And Wilder said the “overly burdensome” law is less about protecting election integrity than it is part of an ongoing effort to “push new kinds of restrictions on voting” after “completely debunked” claims of fraud in the 2020 election.
Österreich Neuesten Nachrichten, Österreich Schlagzeilen
Similar News:Sie können auch ähnliche Nachrichten wie diese lesen, die wir aus anderen Nachrichtenquellen gesammelt haben.
WA jumps appeals court, asks state Supreme Court to take on legal battle over capital gainsThe state Attorney General’s Office files a request for direct review with the state Supreme Court over a recent capital gains ruling.
Weiterlesen »
Perspective | A key Supreme Court ruling protecting workers is now in jeopardyPerspective: The newly conservative court may target the decision that allows for a minimum wage
Weiterlesen »
Susan Collins Will Vote For Supreme Court Nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson—First Republican To Say SoRepublican Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) will support Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, she told the New York Times
Weiterlesen »
Abortion providers ask Idaho Supreme Court to block state's new 6-week banAbortion providers are asking the Idaho Supreme Court to strike down the state's new six-week abortion ban which mimics a controversial Texas law.
Weiterlesen »
Ketanji Brown Jackson a Lock for Supreme Court After Susan Collins' SupportJudge Ketanji Brown Jackson should start cleaning out her drawers at the Court of Appeals, because she's headed to higher ground -- the U.S. Supreme Court.
Weiterlesen »
GOP senator says White House nixed meeting with Supreme Court pick Judge Ketanji Brown JacksonMontana Republican Sen. Steve Daines accused the White House of canceling his meeting with Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson this week before the Senate confirmation process begins in earnest.
Weiterlesen »