Supreme Court partially reinstates Arizona voting law at RNC’s request 

The Supreme Court on Thursday partially agreed to the Republican National Committee’s (RNC) emergency request to revive an Arizona law that strengthens proof-of-citizenship requirements for voting. 

In a 5-4 vote, the justices reinstated Arizona’s law mandating officials reject state voter registration forms if the person did not provide proof of citizenship.   

The court’s three liberal justices — Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented alongside conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett. 

But in voting to deny the RNC’s other request, those four found themselves in the majority, bolstered by support from at least one of Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Brett Kavanaugh. 

"A seismic win in the fight to stop non-citizens from voting -- more to come!" RNC Chairman Michael Whatley wrote on social platform X.

The RNC had demanded the reinstatement of Arizona’s prohibition that prevents registered voters from casting ballots for president or in the mail if they didn’t provide citizenship proof, even if they used a federal-level form to register, where proof is not required.  

If enacted, Arizona's secretary of state's office estimated it could prevent roughly 42,000 people already registered from voting for president this November.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, who are viewed as the Supreme Court’s three leading conservatives, voted to reinstate those provisions, too. 

The ruling came just ahead of Arizona’s ballot printing deadline, enabling the provision to go into effect for this year’s elections, when Arizona is expected to be a critical swing state in the presidential race.  

By not fully agreeing to the RNC’s request, the Supreme Court’s decision sides with the Biden administration. 

The Justice Department has sued over the latter provision as conflicting with federal law, but it has not challenged the portion impacting only state-level forms. 

“Even putting aside the merits, applicants are not entitled to a stay,” U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote in court filings. 

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and various voting rights groups have challenged both sets of the provisions. The case revolves around claims that the changes are unconstitutional, preempted by federal law and violate a consent decree a state official signed in 2018. 

After a federal district judge blocked the provisions and an appeals court refused to lift it, the RNC, joined by Arizona’s top two Republican state lawmakers, thrusted the Supreme Court into the dispute earlier this month by filing an emergency appeal. 

They urged the justices to stay the lower ruling by Aug. 22, which is the state’s ballot printing deadline, arguing that the state was authorized to make the voter registration changes.  

The challengers, however, urged the Supreme Court to stay out the case, insisting the RNC hadn’t cleared their high burden to receive emergency relief. 

Lawyers for the DNC and other private plaintiffs told the justices the RNC “sat on their hands” after losing in a lower court. 

“The tardiness is particularly inexcusable here, as applicants seek to weaponize Arizona’s forthcoming ballot-printing deadline to obtain relief,” their written response reads. 

Democratic Arizona state officials, meanwhile, argued that the Supreme Court’s intervention “would be destabilizing” given the short timeframe before November’s election. 

Updated 3:27 p.m.