Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ARIZONA TO REQUIRE PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP IN STATEWIDE ELECTIONS
breitbart.com ^ | 8 Oct 2013 | TONY LEE

Posted on 10/09/2013 7:57:16 PM PDT by moonshinner_09

fficials in Arizona are seeking to ensure that residents who cannot prove they are United States citizens do not vote in statewide elections. According to the Associated Press, Attorney General Tom Horne and Secretary of State Ken Bennett announced on Monday that "residents who haven't submitted proof of citizenship won't be able vote for such offices as governor, secretary of state, attorney general and candidates for the state Legislature." The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Arizona "couldn't require such documentation to cast ballots for federal offices," and the "only federal offices on Arizona ballots next year will be U.S. House seats." "Because Arizona law requires a registration applicant to provide evidence of citizenship, registrants who have not provided sufficient evidence of citizenship should not be permitted to vote in state and local elections," Horne wrote in a previous opinion, according to the Associated Press. Lawsuits are expected to challenge the action, which Arizona Democrats and the American Civil Liberties Union have already criticized. According to the Associated Press, "the vast majority of Arizonans register by using a state form that requires proof of citizenship, such as a driver's license, U.S. birth certificate, passport or other similar document." The federal registration form, though, "requires registrants only to say they're citizens, but it doesn't require they submit proof."

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: aliens; az; electionfraud; id; immigration; vote; votefraud; voterfraud
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
Obama& Holder will not be happy with this.Expect to see lawsuits coming very soon.
1 posted on 10/09/2013 7:57:16 PM PDT by moonshinner_09
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Woot! Barry and his pal Holder can KMA!


2 posted on 10/09/2013 7:59:07 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (The DemocRAT Pahtay! Spending our grandchildren's future, today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

TESSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


3 posted on 10/09/2013 8:00:06 PM PDT by SADMILLIE (r)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

It’s a start ... now let’s take back the Grand Canyon from the FEDs.


4 posted on 10/09/2013 8:01:18 PM PDT by clamper1797 (Evil WILL flourish when good men WILL not act)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

And they are correct. I hope they kick Eric the Corrupt’s butt in court.


5 posted on 10/09/2013 8:01:20 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet (When His Arrogance talks out of his a$$, Harry Reid's lips move.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Obama better not plan on retiring to Arizona and ever voting again....just saying...not a birther or anything....just think he is really not much of an American.

More like a Muslim terrorist who overstayed his welcome in the peoples house.


6 posted on 10/09/2013 8:02:46 PM PDT by eartick (Been to the line in the sand and liked it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Did the Supreme Court of the Used To Be United States say how AZ could ID real qualified voters, or did they say, “just let anyone vote (as long as they vote for a Dem)”.


7 posted on 10/09/2013 8:08:56 PM PDT by jeffc (The U.S. media are our enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Hey, if Obama and Holder can ignore the law and any ensuing lawsuits, so can the state of Arizona.


8 posted on 10/09/2013 8:10:05 PM PDT by Slyfox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09
The federal registration form, though, "requires registrants only to say they're citizens, but it doesn't require they submit proof."

I wonder how many other countries on this planet have a similar voter ID policy...

9 posted on 10/09/2013 8:14:06 PM PDT by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09
Lawsuits are expected to challenge the action, which Arizona Democrats and the American Civil Liberties Union have already criticized.

Isn't it remarkable that Democrats and the ACLU are ALWAYS against honest elections?

Can you imagine going through life ALWAYS defending duplicity and fraud?

How can they look at themselves in the mirror?

They must, at some level, truly hate themselves.

10 posted on 10/09/2013 8:24:54 PM PDT by Flycatcher (God speaks to us, through the supernal lightness of birds, in a special type of poetry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Booyah!


11 posted on 10/09/2013 8:32:36 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Gov Brewer should have taken the initiative of issuing photo ID’s whenever anybody applied for obamacare.


12 posted on 10/09/2013 9:19:26 PM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09; All
Activist justices are evidently trying to win immigration votes for federal politicians as evidenced by their striking down of Arizona's proof-of-citizenship voting requirement law. After all, the Supreme Court had previously decided in Minor v. Happerset that citizenship didn't automatically confer the right to vote, the states reserving for themselves the power to regulate voting evidenced by the Constitution's Article V and the 10th Amendment.

In fact, note that the states have amended the Constitution to protect voting rights only on the bases on race, sex, tax status and age as evidenced by the 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments respectively.

Also, note that the Founding States made the Constitution's Clause 1 of Section 2 of Article I to clarify that the states must apply the same voter qualification laws used to elect state officials to elections for members of the House of Representatives.

And by unconstitutionally interfering in Article V and 10th Amendment-protected state power to regulate voting, pro-big federal government activist justices are doing nothing more than the following. They are protecting unconstitutional federal government expansion of powers imo, corrupt federal lawmakers buying votes with constitutionally indefensible welfare.

Finally, as I've ranted in other threads, the reason that the federal government continues to get away with the unconstitutional expansion of its powers is the following. Generations of parents have not been making sure that their children are being taught the Constitution as the Founding States had intended for it to be understood, particularly the Founders' division of federal and state government powers.

13 posted on 10/09/2013 9:50:34 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09; All
Activist justices are evidently trying to win immigration votes for federal politicians as evidenced by their striking down of Arizona's proof-of-citizenship voting requirement law. After all, the Supreme Court had previously decided in Minor v. Happerset that citizenship didn't automatically confer the right to vote, the states reserving for themselves the power to regulate voting evidenced by the Constitution's Article V and the 10th Amendment.

In fact, note that the states have amended the Constitution to protect voting rights only on the bases on race, sex, tax status and age as evidenced by the 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments respectively.

Also, note that the Founding States made the Constitution's Clause 1 of Section 2 of Article I to clarify that the states must apply the same voter qualification laws used to elect state officials to elections for members of the House of Representatives.

And by unconstitutionally interfering in Article V and 10th Amendment-protected state power to regulate voting, pro-big federal government activist justices are doing nothing more than the following. They are protecting unconstitutional federal government expansion of powers imo, corrupt federal lawmakers buying votes with constitutionally indefensible welfare.

Finally, as I've ranted in other threads, the reason that the federal government continues to get away with the unconstitutional expansion of its powers is the following. Generations of parents have not been making sure that their children are being taught the Constitution as the Founding States had intended for it to be understood, particularly the Founders' division of federal and state government powers.

14 posted on 10/09/2013 9:52:36 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10; All

I’m sorry for the double post.


15 posted on 10/09/2013 9:53:14 PM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10

PLEASE don’t worry about it.


16 posted on 10/09/2013 10:00:13 PM PDT by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

Arewezonin! AZ gettin’ uppity.


17 posted on 10/09/2013 10:05:10 PM PDT by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09; SandRat; advertising guy; HiJinx; Hildy; HungarianGypsy; azishot; Borax Queen; ...

WOO-HOO!
God bless Arizona!


18 posted on 10/09/2013 10:13:18 PM PDT by onyx (Please Support Free Republic - Donate Monthly! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, Let Me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeffc
I don't understand how the Left gets around this straightforward fact in our constitution, Article I § 2 Clause 1:

"The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second years by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature."

Notwithstanding constitutional amendments regarding minimum age, gender or race discrimination, etc. the states set voter qualifications.

The framers got it right.

19 posted on 10/10/2013 2:21:36 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V is our only hope.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: moonshinner_09

No doubt. As an Arizona voter, IT IS NOT A HARDSHIP TO SHOW ID. (cap rant over)


20 posted on 10/10/2013 4:06:47 AM PDT by machogirl (First they came for my tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson