Left Loses Big in Citizenship-Verification Supreme Court Case

PJ Media ^ | June 17, 2013 | J. Christian Adams

[jazusamo]

Something perverse happened after the Supreme Court’s decision today invalidating citizenship-verification requirements in Arizona for registrants who use the federal voter registration form. The Left knows they lost most of the battle, but are still claiming victory. That’s what they do. Election-integrity proponents and the states are saying they lost, but don’t realize they really won.

The Left wins even when they lose, and conservatives are often bewildered and outfoxed in the election-process game.

Earlier today, I called the decision a nothingburger. After re-reading the case and reflecting a bit more, it’s clear that the decision was a disaster for the Left and their victory cackles are hollow — and they know it.

Worse, conservatives dooms-dayers who have never litigated a single National Voter Registration Act case have taken to the airwaves, describing the case as a disaster which invites illegal-alien voting.

In the last year, I’ve litigated five NVRA cases and worked on the preemption issues for years, and there is more to cheer in today’s opinion than there is to bemoan. Those complaining about the opinion don’t understand what the Left’s goal was in this case: total federal preemption. On that score, Justice Scalia foiled them; indeed, the decision today was a huge war won, even if the small Arizona battle was lost.

From my time in the Justice Department Voting Section, I can remember intimately the wars over some of the preemption issues decided today.

The Left essentially believes that anyone who fills out a federal Election Assistance Commission registration form should be allowed on the rolls, no questions asked. There were complex fights over the “citizen check-off box” issues, with the Left wanting the box rendered meaningless, and conservatives and election-integrity proponents believing a registration cannot be processed until a registrant affirms on the box that he or she is a citizen.

Before the decision today, here is what the Left wanted:

● Invalidation of Arizona’s requirement that those submitting a federal form provide proof of citizenship with their federal form. Mind you, the citizenship-proof requirement is NOT part of federal law and the Election Assistance Commission does NOT require it in the form they drafted.

● Invalidation of state citizenship-verification requirements when a state voter registration form is used (yes, such forms exist separate from the federal requirement) on the basis of federal preemption. They wanted the Arizona case to invalidate all state citizenship-verification requirements.

● Automatic registration if a registrant submits a completed federal EAC approved registration form, no questions asked.

● Federal preemption on the ability for states to have customized federal EAC-approved forms that differed from the default EAC form.

● Federal preemption over states, like Florida and Kansas, looking for independent information on citizenship to root out noncitizens from the voter rolls. Again, the Left wanted the federal EAC form to be the no-questions-asked ticket to the voter rolls.

So what is the score on these five goals after Justice Scalia’s opinion today? Election-integrity advocates are batting .800; left wing groups, .200. And the most insignificant issue of the five is the one issue the Left won. Justice Scalia foiled 4 of 5 of their goals, and the 4 biggest ones.

How does it work? The decision today uncorks state power. The Left wanted state power stripped and they lost.

First, Arizona can simply push the state forms in all state offices and online, and keep those federal forms in the back room gathering dust. When you submit a state form, you have to prove citizenship. Thanks to Justice Scalia, that option is perfectly acceptable. Loss for the Left. Victory for election integrity.

You might say, “That’s a small victory.” Nonsense. This was the whole ballgame to the groups pushing the Arizona lawsuit. They lost, period.

Next, when voters use a state, as opposed to a federal, form, they can still be required to prove citizenship. The federal form is irrelevant in that circumstance.

After the decision today, states have a green light to do double- and triple-checking even if a registrant uses the federal form. The Left wanted the submission of a federal form to mean automatic no-questions-asked registration. This is a big loss for the Left because now states can put suspect forms in limbo while they run checks against non-citizen databases and jury-response forms. Another significant victory in today’s decision. The Left wanted to strip them of that double-checking power.

The decision today is a great example of how conservatives can be distracted by squirrels running past. It is understandable and forgivable because they aren’t daily immersed in the long-term election-process agenda of the left-wing groups. Nor do they daily involve themselves with the details of election process. But having been in the “preemption wars” for nearly a decade, I can assure you this case is a big win, even if it doesn’t appear so at first glance.

[littleharbour]

They’re trying to put lipstick on a pig. Read the dissents. The SCC was never going to strike down the right of the State’s to insist on ID for State and Local elections. That was a red herring. The SCC gave the big victory to the left and, as the two dissents indicate, the bone that Scalia supposedly threw to Arizona is unenforceable.

[DoughtyOne]

You may be right. I’m not an expert in the legalese of these types of cases. I do hope you’re not right though. LOL

[GOPJ]

Those complaining about the opinion don’t understand what the Left’s goal was in this case: total federal preemption. On that score, Justice Scalia foiled them; indeed, the decision today was a huge war won, even if the small Arizona battle was lost.

AND the left is losing elections left and right... there is good news...

[muawiyah]

Scalia did some sleight of hand and refocused the justices on the minor issue of standardized form format ~ it's just the same old same old issue we've been addressing since the day of the high speed line printer with pinwheel fed paper.

Quite a trick really. The rest of the issues raised in litigation do seem to have been ignored!

Read it half a dozen times and realized that there wasn't any meat in there, or else I was suffering early onset Alzheimers or maybe a brain concusion. That makes the dissenting opinion much more important in any future cases ~ there's only one!

[MeganC]

“It seems to me that the only way that this will really benefit the nation is if swing states and Marxist states (the usual suspects) enact positive voter ID/verification.It doesn’t make much difference if Wyoming,for example,enacts it.”

I beg to differ with you. Wyoming is just as important because Wyoming’s US Senators are equal in all respects to those of any other state. When the Senate votes on treaties and appointments then the security of the vote in Wyoming is just as critical as it is in Arizona.

Maybe even more so because just 1,000 fraudulent votes could swing Senate elections in Wyoming whereas 1,000 such votes in Texas would be unlikely to even be noticed.

[rlmorel]

Well stated, 101ORD.

[Jacquerie]

Please excuse my earlier, curt response. Whining here at FR is indeed useless.

[okie01]

The next lawsuit will follow the same track, and they will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars defending it.

And so long as leftist non-profits are partially funded by the U.S. government, we're going to have that problem.

In the meantime, the best course is to fight them on every front, regain power...and defund their sorry butts.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks jazusamo.

[cradle of freedom]

They are revealing what all their tricks are.

[ZULU]

See:

Theycomrtoamerica.com

[devolve]

[oldbrowser]

Anytime we stop the Marxists from doing damage to the constitution or the election laws it’s not a victory, it’s merely a “hold”. When we go on offense and undo some of the damage they have done, then we have a victory.