Sec. of State Brewer Asks Court to Dismiss All Remaining Claims in Prop. 200 Lawsuit Challenging Voter ID Laws

Recent U.S. Supreme Court Ruling Requires Dismissal of Ongoing Challenge

PHOENIX -- Secretary of State Jan Brewer today announced her attorneys will file a motion on her behalf with the court to enter final judgment in her favor in her ongoing legal defense of voting requirements passed into law by over one million voters in 2004 as part of Proposition 200.

The U.S. District Court of Arizona had previously dismissed a majority of the legal claims against Proposition 200 (including proof of citizenship requirements when registering to vote), but had delayed hearing the remaining claims until after the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision involving a challenge to a similar voter ID law in Indiana.

Last month the Supreme Court rejected a facial challenge to an Indiana statute that requires citizens seeking to vote in person on Election Day to present a photo identification issued by the government. The Court found that Indiana 's voter ID statute is “unquestionably relevant to the State's interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.”

“After four years of unsuccessful challenges to our voter integrity laws, it's time for the federal court to follow the precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court and put this matter to rest,” stated Secretary Brewer. “The voters spoke clearly about the need for these election identification procedures, the new requirements appear to be working, and we have been successful in maintaining the integrity of our elections here in Arizona .”

In the brief filed on her behalf by her counsel, Secretary Brewer noted that “after two years of litigation, plaintiffs have not identified a single Latino or Native American citizen who cannot register to vote because he or she lacks proof of citizenship.” In asking for final relief in her favor, Secretary Brewer noted that no reasonable fact-finder could conclude that the proof of citizenship or voting identification requirement results in discrimination based on race, and because plaintiffs cannot demonstrate an undue burden on the right to vote, she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Added Brewer, “The Arizona voters have openly embraced these voting requirements, and as a result of the strong education efforts of my office and the county election officials, over 99 percent of the voters had absolutely no problem complying with the new law during the 2006 election,” said Secretary Brewer.

-30-