Arizona Supreme Court allows 98,000 to vote without confirmed citizenship
- The Arizona Supreme Court ruled that nearly 98,000 registered voters can vote in the November 5 general election despite a clerical error.
- A 2004 clerical error allowed residents to register without proof of citizenship, which was required by a law enacted in 2005.
- The court emphasized the importance of not disenfranchising voters and stated that affected individuals must provide proof of citizenship for future elections.
On September 21, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that nearly 98,000 registered voters in Arizona can participate in the upcoming general election on November 5, despite a clerical error that had put their voting status in jeopardy. This decision followed an emergency petition filed by Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, which sought to restore voting rights for those affected by a long-standing issue related to citizenship verification. The clerical error, dating back to 2004, allowed residents to register without providing necessary documentation of their citizenship, a requirement established by a law enacted in 2005. The error went unnoticed for nearly two decades, leading to uncertainty for tens of thousands of voters regarding their eligibility to vote. Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer emphasized the court's unwillingness to disenfranchise voters, stating that doing so would violate due process principles. The ruling highlighted that there was no evidence to suggest that the affected individuals were not U.S. citizens. While the court's decision allows these voters to cast their ballots in the upcoming election, it also stipulates that they will need to provide proof of citizenship for future elections. This ruling underscores the importance of ensuring that eligible voters are not unjustly removed from the voter rolls due to administrative errors. The implications of this ruling are significant, as it not only affects the immediate election but also sets a precedent for how similar issues may be handled in the future. The court's decision reflects a commitment to protecting voting rights and ensuring that all eligible citizens have the opportunity to participate in the democratic process.