Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona Brief of Amici Curiae in Support of Respondents

    No. 12-71

In The

Supreme Court of tfte States

ARIZONA, et al.,

v.
Petitioners,

IN TER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA, INC., et a l, 
an d  JE S U S  M. GONZALES, et a l,

Respondents.

On Writ of Certiorari to the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

B R IE F  O F  A M IC I CURIAE  N A A CP LEG A L 
D E F E N S E  & E D U C A T IO N A L  F U N D , IN C ., T H E  
L E A D E R S H IP  C O N F E R E N C E  O N  C IV IL  AND 

H U M A N  R IG H T S , AND T H E  A N TI-D E FA M A T IO N  
L E A G U E  IN  S U P P O R T  O F  R E S P O N D E N T S

Debo P. Adegibile 
Acting President & 
Director-Counsel 

Elise C. Boddie 
Ryan P. Haygood 

Counsel of Record 
NAACP Legal Defense 

& Educational Fund , Inc . 
99 Hudson Street, 16th Floor 
New York, NY 10013 
(212) 965-2200 
rhaygood@naacpldf.org

JOSHUA ClVIN 
NAACP Legal Defense 

& Educational Fund , Inc . 
1444 I Street, NW, 10th Floor 
Washington, DC 20005

Michael B. de Leeuw 
Deuel Ross 
Victorien Wu 
Fried , Frank, Harris, 

Shriver & J acobson LLP 
One New York Plaza 
New York, NY 10004

ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED ON INSIDE COVER

mailto:rhaygood@naacpldf.org


Wade Henderson 
Lisa M. Bornstein 
Leadership Conference 

on Civil and Human Rights 
1629 K Street, NW, 10th Floor 
Washington, DC 20006

Steven M. Freeman 
Lauren A. J ones 
J ustine K. Fanarof 
Anti-Defamation League 
605 Third Avenue 
New York, NY 10158

J erome Gotkin 
Michael Arnold 
Mintz Levin Cohen Ferris 

Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. 
666 Third Avenue 
New York, NY 10017



1

TA B LE O F  C O N T EN T S

Page
IN TERESTS OF THE A M IC I......................................... 1

SUMMARY OF THE A R G U M E N T ................................ 3

A R G U M E N T .......................................................................... 5

I. S ta tes  have a long and  well-docum ented 
h isto ry  of d iscrim inating  ag a in st voters of
co lo r.....................................................................................5

A. E arly  federal efforts to enfranchise 
Blacks during  R econstruction were 
la te r  underm ined  by s ta te  election
la w s ............................................................................... 6

B. The Voting R ights Act of 1965 
abolished m any of the  b a rrie rs  to full 
political partic ipa tion  for voters of
color.............................................................................10

C. Black reg is tra tio n  ra te s  rem ained  
significantly  lower th a n  those of 
W hites even a fte r th e  enactm en t of
the  VRA......................................................................12

II. Congress enacted  the  NVRA in  response
to persisting  d iscrim inatory  voting laws 
an d  to equalize access to voter 
re g is tra tio n ............................  17

A. The NVRA is a civil righ ts  s ta tu te  
designed to increase voter
reg is tra tio n  am ong people of color 
and  th e  po o r..............................................................17



ii

B. V oter reg is tra tio n  ra te s  am ong people 
of color have increased  significantly
as a re su lt of the  N V R A ........................................19

III.A rizona’s P roposition 200 is inconsisten t 
w ith  and  p reem pted  by the  N ational 
V oter R eg istra tion  A c t.................................................22

C O N C LU SIO N .....................................................................25



Ill

TA B LE O F  A U T H O R IT IE S  

C ases

Page(s)

Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 U.S. 1 (2009)....................... 11

Beer u. United States,425 U.S. 130 (1976)....................... 1

Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952 (1 9 9 6 )..................................... 1

Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380 (1991)............................ 1

Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 U.S. 330 (1972)....................... 10

Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001).........................1

Ferrand v. Schedler, No. 11-926, 2012 WL 1570094 
(E.D. La. M ay 3, 2 0 1 2 ).....................................................20

Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U.S. 461 (2003)..........................1

Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960)....................2

Gonzalez v. Arizona, 677 F.3d 383 (9th Cir. 2012)
(en b a n c ) ....................................................................... 23, 24

Gonzalez v. Arizona, No. 06-1268, slip op.
(D. Ariz. Aug. 20, 2008)...................................................23

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections,
383 U.S. 663 (1966).......................................................... 10

Houston Lawyers’ Association v. Attorney General of 
Texas, 501 U.S. 419 (1991)............................................... 1

Hunter v. Underwood, 471 U.S. 222 (1985).....................8

Kirksey v. Board of Supervisors of Hinds County,
Mississippi, 554 F.2d 139 (5th Cir. 1977)....................2

League of United Lathi American Citizens v.
Clements, 999 F.2d 831 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc)......2



IV

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry,
548 U.S. 399 (2006).............................................................1

Louisiana u. United States, 380 U.S. 145 (1965)......... 10

Mississippi State Chapter, Operation Push, Inc. v. 
Mabus, 932 F.2d 400 (5th Cir. 1991).......................... . 16

Mississippi State Chapter, Operation PUSH v.
Attain, 674 F. Supp. 1245 (N.D. M iss. 1 9 8 7 )............13

NAACP, DeKalb County Chapter v. Georgia,
494 F. Supp. 668 (N.D. Ga. 1980)........................ 15, 16

Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District Number 
One v. Holder, 557 U.S. 193 (2009)................................1

Reno v. Bossier Parish School Board, 528 U.S. 320 
(2000)........................................................................................ 9

Schnell v. Davis, 336 U.S. 933 (1949) (per c u r ia m )......2

Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899 (1996).............. ......................1

Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder, 679 F.3d 848 
(D.C. Cir. 2012)...................................................................... 2

Sm ith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649 (1944)....................2, 10

South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 301 (1966).....7

Terry v. Adams, 345 U.S. 461 (1953).................................2

Texas v. Holder, No. 12-128, 2012 WL 3743676 
(D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2 0 1 2 )............................................   15

Thornburg v. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 (1986)....................... 1

United States v. Florida, 870 F. Supp. 2d 1346 
(N.D. Fla. 2012)...................................................................21

United States v. Hays, 515 U.S. 737 (1995)......................... 1

United States v. Louisiana, No. 11-470, 2011 WL 
6012992 (M.D. La. Dec. 1, 2 0 1 1 ).....................................21



V

White v. Regester, 422 U.S. 935 (1975) (per cu riam ).....2

Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)...........................3

Zimmer v. McKeithen, 485 F.2d 1297 (5th Cir. 1973)...2

C o n s t i tu t io n .  F e d e r a l  S ta tu te s ,  a n d  
C o n g re s s io n a l  M a te r ia ls

U.S. Const, am end. X IV .......................................................... 6

U.S. Const, am end. X V ........................................................... 6

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg................................................................ 13,

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg(a)(3).................................................3, 19

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg(b)(l).................................................3, 18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-2(a)(l)....................................................18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-2(a)(2)....................................................18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-2(a)(3)....................................................18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-4.............................................................. 18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-5.............................................................. 18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-5(a)(6)....................................................18

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(d)........................................................ 19

42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-7(a)(2)....................................................18

Voting R ights Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-110,
79 S ta t. 937...........................................................................11

139 Cong. Rec. H505 (daily ed. Feb. 4, 1993)............... 17

H.R. Rep. No. 53-18 (1893).....................................................7

H.R. Rep. No. 103-66 (1993) (Conf. Rep.), reprinted in 
1993 U.S.C.C.A.N. 140......................................................18



VI

H.R. Rep. No. 109-478 (2006), reprinted in 2006 
U.S.C.C.A.N. 618 .......................................................................................... . . . . . . 1 2

S. Rep. No. 103-6 (1993).................   16

Voter Registration: Hearing Held Before the House 
Subcommittee on Elections, Committee on House 
Administration, 103rd C ongress (1993)..................... 17

The State of the Right to Vote After the 2012 Election: 
Hearing Before the Senate Committee on the 
Judiciary, 112th Congress (2012) (s ta tem en t of N ina 
P erales, Vice P residen t of L itigation, M exican 
A m erican Legal D efense and  E ducational Fund), 
available at http://w w w .judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/12- 
12-19PeralesTestim ony.pdf. ................................... 23, 24

S ta te  S ta tu te s

Ariz. Rev. S ta t. § 16-166(F)................................................ 23

C o u r t  F i l in g s

C onsent Decree, United States v. Rhode Island,
No. 11-113S (D.R.I. M ar. 25, 2011), ECF No. 3 .......21

C onsent Decree, United States v. Tennessee,
No. 02-0938 (M.D. Tenn. Oct. 16, 2002)..................... 21

P la in tiffs’ Proposed F indings of Fact, Proposed 
Conclusions of Law, and  Proposed Injunctive 
Rem edy, Scott v. Schedler, No. 11-926 
(E.D. La. Oct. 5, 2012), ECF No. 3 7 2 ..........................21

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/12-12-19PeralesTestimony.pdf
http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/pdf/12-12-19PeralesTestimony.pdf


vii

O th e r  A u th o r i t ie s

Debo P. Adegbile, Voting Rights in Louisiana: 1982- 
2006, 17 S. Cal. Rev. L. & Soc. Ju s t. 413 (2008)........ 8

Agreement Between the United States Department of 
Justice and the Arizona Department of Economic 
Security Concerning Standards and Monitoring of 
Compliance with the National Voter Registration Act 
of 1993 (May 15, 2008), http://ww w .justice.gov/crt/ 
about/vot/nvra/az_nvra_m oa.php ....................................2

Jam es E. Alt, The Impact of the Voting Rights Act on 
Black and White Voter Registration in the South, in 
Q uiet Revolution in th e  South  351 (C handler 
Davidson & B ern ard  G rofm an ed., 1993) 9, 12, 14, 15

Robert Brown & J u s tin  W edeking, People Who Have 
Their Tickets But Do Not Use Them: “Motor Voter, ” 
Registration, and Turnout Revisited, 34 Am. Pol.
Res. 479 (2006)....................................................................19

W illiam  C rotty, The Franchise: Registration Changes 
and Voter Representation, in Paths to Political 
Reform 67 (1980)....................................................   14

D ayna L. C unningham , Who Are to Be the Electors2 
A Reflection on the History of Voter Registration in 
the United States, 9 Yale L. & Pol’y Rev. 370 
(1991)..................................................................9, 13, 14, 16

C handler Davidson, The Recent Evolution of Voting 
Rights Law Affecting Racial and Language 
Minorities, in Quiet Revolution in the South 21 
(C handler D avidson & B ernard  G rofm an ed.,
1993) 9

http://www.justice.gov/crt/


vm

C hand ler D avidson & B ernard  G rofm an, The Voting 
Rights Act and the Second Reconstruction, in Quiet 
Revolution in the South  378 (C handler D avidson & 
B ern ard  G rofm an eds., 1993 )........................................ 12

H arry  J . E n ten , White Voter Decline in 2012: The 
Conundrum Behind the Cliche, The G uard ian  (Nov.
9, 2012), available at h ttp ://w w w .guardian.co .uk/ 
com m entisfree/2012/nov/09/w hite-voter-decline- 
2012 conundrum ................................................................. 12

D avid J . Garrow , Protests at Selma: Martin Luther 
King, Jr., and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 
(1978).......................................   10

N a th an  V. Gem m iti, Note, Porsche or Pinto? The 
Impact of the “Motor Voter Registration A ct” on 
Black Political Participation, 18 B.C. T hird  
W orld L.J. 71 (1998).................................... 13, 17, 19, 24

L ani G uinier, Keeping the Faith: Black Voters in the 
Post-Reagan Era, 24 H arv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 393 
(1989)......................................................................................14

P resid en t Lyndon B. Johnson, A ddress to Congress 
on th e  V oting R ights Act: We Shall Overcome (Mar. 
15, 1965), available at w ww.historyplace.com / 
speeches/johnson .h tm ....................................................... 11

P resid en t Lyndon B. Johnson, Special M essage to the  
Congress: The A m erican Prom ise, 1 Pub. P ap ers  281 
(M ar. 15, 1965), availab le a t
http://lbjlibrary.org/lyndon-baines-johnson/speeches-
film s/president-johnsons-special-m essage-to-the-
congress-the-am erican-prom ise.....................................6

S tan ley  Kelley et al., Registration and Voting:
Putting First Things First, 61 Am. Pol. Sci. Rev.
359 (1967)..................................................................... ...... 13

http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://www.historyplace.com/
http://lbjlibrary.org/lyndon-baines-johnson/speeches-


IX

A lexander K eyssar, The Right to Vote: The Contested 
History of Dem ocracy in the United States (2009).....6

Youjin B. Kim & L isa D anetz, Demos, 1 Million New 
Voters Among the 99%: How Agency-Based Voter 
Registration Gives Low-Income Americans a Voice in 
Democracy (2011), available at h ttp://w w w .dem os, 
org/ sites/default/files/publications/M illion_M ark_D e
m os.pdf.................................................................................. 22

J.M . K ousser, The Shaping of Southern Politics: 
Suffrage Restriction and the Establishment of the 
One-Party South, 1880-1910 (1974).............................8

L aw yers’ C om m ittee for Civil R ights U nder Law &
The Sentencing Project, The Discriminatory Effects 
of Felony Disenfranchisement Laws, Policies and 
Practices on Minority Civic Participation in the 
United States (2009), available at 
http://w w w .sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/ 
publications/fd_U N M inorityForum .pdf....................... 8

M ark Thom as Q uinlivan, Com m ent, One Person, One 
Vote Revisited: The Impending Necessity of Judicial 
Intervention in the Realm of Voter Registration,
137 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2361 (1989).................................8, 14

Sam  R oberts, 2008 Surge in Black Voters Nearly 
Erased Racial Gap, N.Y. Times, Ju ly  21, 2009, 
available at http://ww w .nytim es.com /2009/
07/2 l/us/politics/2  lv o te .h tm l............ ........................... 12

Estelle H. Rogers, The National Voter Registration 
Act: Fifteen Years On (2009), available at 
www.acslaw .org/sites/default/files/Rogers_- 
_NVRA_at_15.pdf............................................................. 20

R ichard  Sam m on, Deal May Speed Up “Motor Voter, ” 
Cong. Q. Wkly. Rep., M ay 1, 1993........................ 19, 24

http://www.demos
http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/
http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Rogers_-_NVRA_at_15.pdf
http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Rogers_-_NVRA_at_15.pdf


X

R ichard  M. Valley, The Two Reconstructions: The 
Struggle for Black Enfranchisement (2004)............6, 7

U.S. D ep artm en t of Com m erce, B u reau  of the
C ensus, S ta tis tic a l A b strac ts  of th e  U.S. (1 9 8 8 ).....15

Voting, U .S. D ep artm en t of Ju stice , h ttp ://w w w . 
justice.gov/crt/about/vot/ (last v isited  J a n u a ry  13, 
2 0 1 3 ) ........................................................................... ..............5

http://www


1
IN T E R E S T S  O F  T H E  A M IC E

The NAACP Legal D efense an d  E ducational 
F und, Inc. (LDF) is a non-profit legal organization  
estab lish ed  u n d e r th e  law s of New York to ass is t 
B lack an d  o th er people of color in  th e  full, fair, and  
free exercise of th e ir  constitu tiona l righ ts. Founded 
in  1940 u n d e r th e  leadersh ip  of Thurgood M arshall, 
LD F focuses on e lim ina ting  rac ial d iscrim ination  in  
education, economic justice, c rim inal justice, and  po­
litical partic ipa tion .

LD F h as  been  involved in  n early  all of th e  p rece­
d en t-se ttin g  litiga tion  re la tin g  to m inority  voting 
rig h ts  before s ta te  and  federal courts  rep resen tin g  
p a rtie s  or as am icus curiae, including cases involv­
ing co n stitu tiona l an d  legal challenges to d iscrim ina­
tory  s ta te  voter reg is tra tio n  law s. See, e.g., Nw. Aus­
tin Mun. Util. Dist. No. One v. Holder, 557 U.S. 193 
(2009); League of United Latin Am. Citizens v. Perry, 
548 U.S. 399 (2006); Georgia v. Ashcroft, 539 U.S. 
461 (2003); Easley u. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234 (2001); 
Bush v. Vera, 517 U.S. 952 (1996); Shaw v. Hunt, 
517 U.S. 899 (1996); United States v. Hays, 515 U.S. 
737 (1995); Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380 (1991); 
Hous. Lawyers’ A ss’n u. Attorney Gen. of Tex., 501 
U.S. 419 (1991); Thornburg u. Gingles, 478 U.S. 30 
(1986); Beer v. United States, 425 U.S. 130 (1976);

1 P u rsu an t to Suprem e Court Rule 37.6, counsel for amici 
s ta te  th a t  no counsel for a party  authored th is brief in  whole or 
in part, and no person other th an  amici, th e ir members, or 
th e ir counsel made a m onetary contribution to the preparation 
or subm ission of th is brief. The parties have filed b lanket con­
sen t le tte rs  w ith the Clerk of the Court p u rsu an t to Supreme 
Court Rule 37.3.

i



2
White v. Regester, 422 U.S. 935 (1975) (per curiam ); 
Gomillion v. Lightfoot, 364 U.S. 339 (1960); Terry v. 
Adams, 345 U.S. 461 (1953); Schnell v. Davis, 336 
U.S. 933 (1949) (per curiam ); Sm ith v. Allwright, 321 
U.S. 649 (1944); Shelby Cnty., Ala. v. Holder, 679 
F .3d 848 (D.C. Cir. 2012); League of United Latin  
Am. Citizens v. Clements, 999 F .2d 831 (5th  Cir. 
1993) (en banc); Kirksey v. Bd. of Supervisors, 554 
F .2d 139 (5th  Cir. 1977); Zimmer v. McKeithen, 485 
F .2d 1297 (5 th  Cir. 1973). As such, LD F h as  a sig­
n ifican t in te re s t in  en su rin g  th e  full, proper, and  
con tinued  enforcem ent of th e  N a tional V oter R egis­
tra tio n  A ct of 1993.

The L eadersh ip  Conference on Civil an d  H um an  
R igh ts is th e  n a tio n ’s oldest an d  la rg e st civil an d  
h u m a n  rig h ts  coalition, consisting  of m ore th a n  210 
n a tio n a l o rgan izations charged  w ith  prom oting  an d  
p ro tec ting  th e  r ig h ts  of all persons in  th e  U n ited  
S ta tes . The L eadersh ip  Conference w as founded in  
1950 by A. Philip  R andolph, h ead  of th e  B rotherhood 
of S leeping C ar P o rters; Roy W ilkins of th e  NAACP; 
an d  A rnold A ronson, a  lead e r of th e  N a tional Jew ish  
C om m unity  R elations Advisory Council. The L ead ­
e rsh ip  Conference w orks to bu ild  an  A m erica th a t  is 
inclusive an d  as good as its  ideals.

The A nti-D efam ation  L eague (ADL) w as founded 
in  1913— a t a  tim e  w hen an ti-S em itism  w as ra m ­
p a n t in  th e  U n ited  S ta te s—to advance good will an d  
m u tu a l u n d e rs tan d in g  am ong all A m ericans of all 
creeds an d  races, an d  to com bat rac ia l an d  religious 
p rejudice in  th e  U n ited  S ta tes . ADL is v ita lly  in te r ­
ested  in  p ro tec ting  th e  civil rig h ts  of all persons, 
w h e th er th ey  a re  m em bers of th e  m inority  or the  
m ajority , and  in en su rin g  th a t  each ind iv idual re-



3
ceives equal tre a tm e n t u n d e r th e  law  regard less of 
race, e thn icity , or religion. C onsisten t w ith  its  m is­
sion, ADL opposes ballo t access req u irem en ts  th a t  
d isp roportionate ly  affect th e  voting rig h ts  of rac ia l or 
e thn ic  groups.

SU M M A RY  O F  T H E  A R G U M E N T

Recognized by th is  C ourt as th e  r ig h t th a t  is 
“p reserv a tiv e  of all rig h ts ,” Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 
U.S. 356, 370 (1886), th e  r ig h t to vote is th e  co rner­
stone of our dem ocracy. B ut A m erica’s re la tionsh ip  
w ith  th e  r ig h t to vote is a con tested  one, c h a rac te r­
ized by periods of expansion  of the  e lecto rate  often 
followed by efforts to con tract voter access.

A gainst th is  h isto rica l backdrop, C ongress e n ­
acted  th e  N a tional V oter R eg istra tion  Act of 1993 
(NVRA) to expand  A m erica’s prom ise of dem ocracy 
by th e  People by m aking  vo ter reg is tra tio n  opportu ­
n itie s  m ore w idely availab le  and, u ltim ate ly , po liti­
cally engaging, am ong o thers, th e  m ost m arg inalized  
in  our democracy: people of color and  th e  poor. 42 
U.S.C. §§ 1973gg(a)(3), (b)(1). As in ten d ed  by Con­
gress, vo ter reg is tra tio n  increased  dram atically , w ith  
20 m illion new  voters, n early  h a lf  of whom w ere 
Black, reg is te rin g  betw een 1995 and  Ju n e  1996. 
W idely recognized for its p ivotal role in  u sh erin g  in  a 
new, b u t no t com plete, period of dem ocratic expan ­
sion in  th is  N ation, th e  NVRA also led to significant 
im provem ents in  d isp aritie s  in  reg is tra tio n  ra te s  be­
tw een  people of color an d  W hites.

As exp lained  m ore fully below, however, following 
record  p artic ip a tio n  by vo ters of color in  several re ­
cent election cycles, and  th e  su b s ta n tia l grow th of 
com m unities of color in th e  la s t decade, several



4
s ta te s , inc lud ing  A rizona, have  adop ted  voting 
m easu res  to d im in ish  access to th e  vote by people of 
color.

B etw een 2000 an d  2010, th e  n u m b er of L atinos in  
A rizona increased  su b stan tia lly , by 600,000, an d  L a ­
tinos now com prise 30 percen t of th e  s ta te ’s pop u la ­
tion. C iting  a  need  to  com bat undocum ented  im m i­
g ra tion , A rizona responded  by adopting  Proposition  
200. T his d iscrim inato ry  m easu re  req u ire s  county 
re g is tra rs  to reject any  app lication  for reg is tra tio n  
th a t  is no t accom panied by ce rta in  types of docum en­
ta ry  evidence of U n ited  S ta te s  c itizenship . W hile 
c itizensh ip  is a legal req u irem en t to re g is te r  and  
vote, law s like Proposition  200 e rect onerous docu­
m en ta ry  proof req u irem en ts  th a t  in h ib it th e  reg is­
tra tio n  of eligible voters.

A lthough  A rizona failed  to identify  a single in ­
s tance  in  w hich an  undocum ented  im m ig ran t reg is­
te re d  to vote or voted in  th e  s ta te , th e  im pact of th e  
law  w as clear: following th e  en ac tm en t of P roposi­
tion  200, A rizona re jected  th e  reg is tra tio n  app lica­
tions of m ore th a n  30,000 ind iv iduals. Of these , 
n ea rly  17 percen t w ere Latinos. The C ourt of A p­
peals, s ittin g  en banc, s tru ck  down Proposition  200 
as applied  to th e  F edera l Form , a  n a tio n a lly  uniform  
vo ter app lication  th a t  ap p lican ts  can use to  reg is te r 
by m ail, recognizing th a t  Proposition  200 w as bo th  
in co n sisten t w ith  an d  p reem p ted  by th e  NVRA.

Am ici w rite  sep a ra te ly  to m ake th re e  key points. 
First, th is  am icus b rie f provides th e  h is to rica l b ack ­
drop ag a in s t w hich th e  NVRA w as enac ted  and  de­
ta ils  various d iscrim inato ry  m easu res  th a t  w ere em ­
ployed by a num b er of s ta te s  to p rev en t vo ters of 
color an d  th e  poor from  exercising th e ir  voting



5
rig h ts. Second, th is  am icus b rie f describes th e  m an ­
n e r in  w hich Congress, responding  to th is  a n ti­
dem ocratic period of exclusion in  A m erican  history, 
enacted  th e  NVRA to u sh e r in  a period of electoral 
expansion. Finally, th is  b rie f argues th a t, absen t 
full enforcem ent of th e  NVRA, m easu res such as 
A rizona’s P roposition  200 will u n d erm ine  th e  hard- 
fought p rogress th a t  h a s  been  m ade in  com bating 
d iscrim ination  in  our political process.

Accordingly, am ici respectfu lly  u rge th is  C ourt to 
uphold  th e  ru lin g  of th e  C ourt of A ppeals.

A R G U M E N T

I. S ta te s  h a v e  a  lo n g  a n d  w e ll-d o c u m e n te d  
h i s to r y  o f  d i s c r im in a t in g  a g a in s t  v o te r s  o f  
c o lo r .

N early  fifty y ears  ago, in  h is speech proposing the  
bill th a t  would become know n as “th e  m ost success­
ful piece of civil rig h ts  leg islation  ever adopted ,” V ot­
ing, U.S. D ep’t  of Ju stice , http://w w w .justice.gov/ 
crt/about/vot/ (last v isited  J a n u a ry  13, 2013), P res i­
den t Lyndon Joh n so n  fram ed  th e  challenge posed by 
our N a tio n ’s lam en tab le  tra d itio n  of rac ia l d iscrim i­
n a tio n  in  voting:

M any of th e  issues of civil rig h ts  a re  very 
complex an d  m ost difficult. B ut about th is  
th e re  can  and  should  be no a rgum ent. Every 
A m erican  citizen m u st have an  equal rig h t to 
vote. T here  is no reason  w hich can excuse 
th e  den ial of th a t  righ t. T here is no duty  
w hich w eighs m ore heavily  on us th a n  the  
du ty  we have to en su re  th a t  righ t.

http://www.justice.gov/


6
P res id en t Lyndon B. Johnson , Special M essage to 
th e  Congress: The A m erican  Prom ise, 1 Pub. P ap ers  
281, 282 (M ar. 15, 1965), available at
http ://lb jlibrary .org /lyndon-baines-johnson/speeches- 
film s/president-johnsons-special-m essage-to-the- 
congress-the-am erican-p rom ise .

As lead ing  h is to rian s  have  explained, th e  e x ten ­
sion of th e  r ig h t to vote in  A m erica h a s  been con­
tested , ch arac te rized  by expansions often followed by 
sw ift contractions; gains in  political p a rtic ip a tio n  by 
com m unities of color a re  too often  m et w ith  co rre­
sponding efforts to constric t th e  franch ise. See A lex­
an d e r K eyssar, The Right to Vote: The Contested H is­
tory of Democracy in the United States xxiii (2009). 
The figh t for th e  vote for B lack A m ericans provides a 
p rim e exam ple of th is  phenom enon. No o th er d e ­
m ocracy in  th e  world h a s  en franch ised  a la rge  group, 
th e n  d isfranch ised  it— an d  th e n  re-en franch ised  it. 
See R ichard  M. Valley, The Two Reconstructions: 
The Struggle for Black Enfranchisement 1-2 (2004).

A. E a r ly  f e d e r a l  e f fo r t s  to  e n f r a n c h i s e  
B la c k s  d u r in g  R e c o n s t r u c t io n  w e re  l a t e r  
u n d e r m in e d  b y  s t a t e  e le c t io n  la w s.

Following th e  Civil W ar, C ongress moved swiftly 
to e s tab lish  w idespread  B lack suffrage. B etw een 
1866 an d  1867, th e  percen tage  of B lack m ales e lig i­
ble to vote “shot up from  .5 pe rcen t to 80.5 percent, 
w ith  all of th e  increase  in  th e  form er C onfederacy.” 
V alley, supra , a t 3.

By 1870, th e  U.S. C onstitu tion  fea tu red  two new  
am endm en ts , th e  F o u rteen th  an d  F ifteen th , e n sh r in ­
ing th e  r ig h t to vote. See U .S. Const, am end. XIV, 
am end. XV. W ith  those co n stitu tio n a l am endm ents,

http://lbjlibrary.org/lyndon-baines-johnson/speeches-films/president-johnsons-special-message-to-the-congress-the-american-promise
http://lbjlibrary.org/lyndon-baines-johnson/speeches-films/president-johnsons-special-message-to-the-congress-the-american-promise
http://lbjlibrary.org/lyndon-baines-johnson/speeches-films/president-johnsons-special-message-to-the-congress-the-american-promise


7
th e  firs t R econstruction, a period of dem ocratic ex­
pansion , w as well underw ay. “B lack office-holding 
em erged very  rap id ly ” du ring  R econstruction. V al­
ley, supra, a t  3. “A bout h a lf  of th e  lower house of 
South  C aro lina’s leg is la tu re  . . . w as [BJlaek; 42 p e r­
cent of L o u isiana’s low er [state] house w as Black; 
an d  29 percen t of M ississipp i’s s ta te  house w as 
B lack.” Id.

B ut th e  a b ru p t end  of R econstruction in  1877 of­
fers a  b itte r  lesson about the  consequences of failed 
political will to su s ta in  com prehensive voting righ ts  
for vo ters of color. Following th e  dem ise of Recon­
struction , s ta te s  an d  localities in  th e  Old C onfeder­
acy engaged in  decades of “u n rem ittin g  an d  ingen­
ious defiance of th e  C onstitu tion ,” by p rom ulgating  
num erous m easu res  designed e ith e r to p reven t 
B lacks from  voting, or to cancel ou t th e  effect of the  
Black vote. South Carolina v. Katzenbach, 383 U.S. 
301, 309 (1966).

By th e  1890s, only “a g enera tion  a fte r th e  g rea t 
expansion  in  B lack voting an d  office-holding,” 
S ou thern  leg is la tu res  “extinguish[ed] voting righ ts 
for th e  g rea t m ajority” of B lacks, as C ongress d is­
m an tled  R econstruction-era  s ta tu te s . Valley, supra, 
a t 3. Indeed, “[a] H ouse rep o rt from  the  F ifty -th ird  
C ongress (1893-1895) dem anded  th a t  ‘every trace  of 
reconstruction  m easu res be w iped from  th e  books.’” 
Id. a t  1 (quoting H.R. Rep. No. 53-18, a t  7 (1893)). 
W ithout th e  dem ocratic p ro tections of th e  Recon­
s truc tion -era  s ta tu te s , d iscrim inato ry  voting laws 
pro liferated , as s ta te s  im plem ented  g ran d fa th er 
clauses, vo ter roll purges, poll taxes, s tric t voter 
identification  req u irem en ts, an d  lite racy  an d  “u n ­
d e rs tan d in g ” te s ts— each of w hich w as discrim inate-



8

rily  enforced ag a in s t B lack vo ters a t  th e  polls. See 
generally Debo P. Adegbile, Voting Rights in Louisi­
ana: 1982-2006, 17 S. Cal. Rev. L. & Soc. J u s t. 413, 
416-19 (2008) (tracing  th e  h is to ry  of voting rig h ts  
d iscrim ina tion  in  L ou isiana  to th e  p re sen t day). 
Specifically, “‘th e  key d isfranch ising  fea tu res  of th e  
so u th e rn  reg is tra tio n  law s w ere th e  am o u n t of d is­
cre tion  g ran ted  to th e  re g is tra rs , th e  specificity of 
th e  in fo rm ation  req u ired  of th e  re g is tra n t, th e  tim es 
an d  p laces set for reg is tra tio n , an d  th e  req u irem en t 
th a t  a vo te r b rin g  h is re g is tra tio n  certificate  to th e  
polling place.’” M ark  Thom as Q uinlivan, Com m ent, 
One Person, One Vote Revisited: The Impending Ne­
cessity of Judicial Intervention in the Realm of Voter 
Registration, 137 U. Pa. L. Rev. 2361, 2368 (1989) 
(quoting J . M. K ousser, The Shaping of Southern 
Politics: Suffrage Restriction and the Establishment 
of the One-Party South, 1880-1910 48 (1974)). To 
d isfranch ise  vo ters of color fu rth e r, s ta te s  also ta i ­
lored  law s th a t  d isqualified  people convicted of 
crim ina l offenses to apply  to crim es th o u g h t to be 
com m itted  by new ly freed  B lacks b u t no t by W hites. 
See Hunter u. Underwood, 471 U .S. 222, 224-27 
(1985) (s trik ing  down A labam a’s 1901 felon d is fran ­
ch isem en t law  because i t  w as enacted  w ith  a d is ­
c rim in a to ry  purpose); L aw yers’ Comm, for Civil 
R ights U nder Law  & The S en tencing  Project, The 
Discriminatory Effects of Felony Disenfranchisement 
Laws, Policies and Practices on Minority Civic Par­
ticipation in the United States 3-4 (2009), available 
at h ttp ://w w w .sentencingprject.org/doc/publications/ 
publications/fd__U N M inorityForum .pdf.

In  addition , s ta te s  passed  “second g enera tion” 
b a rr ie rs— a seam less co n tinua tion  of th e  previous

http://www.sentencingprject.org/doc/publications/


9
d iscrim ination , ak in  to “pour[ing] old poison in to  
new  bo ttles ,” Reno v. Bossier Parish Sch. Bd., 528 
U.S. 320, 366 (2000) (Souter, J ., concurring  in  p a r t 
an d  d issen tin g  in  p a rt)—to p rev en t B lack p a rtic ip a ­
tion  in  voting. These efforts enab led  county councils 
an d  school boards, for exam ple, to use  a t-la rge  elec­
tions to subm erge new ly reg is tered  m inority  voters 
w ith in  W hite m ajorities, d raw  rac ial gerrym anders, 
close or secretly  move polling s ta tio n s  in  m inority  
neighborhoods, an d  em ploy countless o ther s tra te ­
gies to m inim ize th e  voting s tre n g th  of vo ters of 
color. See C hand ler D avidson, The Recent Evolution 
of Voting Rights Law Affecting Racial and Language 
Minorities, in Quiet Revolution in the South  21, 22- 
27 (C hand ler D avidson & B ern ard  G rofm an eds., 
1993).

Together, th ese  schem es reduced  m inority  p a r ­
tic ipa tion  to insignificance. By th e  early  1900s, the  
rac ially  d iscrim inato ry  app lication  of these  law s re ­
su lted  in  th e  d isfranch isem en t of 90 percen t of 
B lacks in  th e  D eep South. See Jam es  E. Alt, The 
Impact of the Voting Rights Act on Black and White 
Voter Registration in the South, in Quiet Revolution 
in the South  351, 354-56 (C handler D avidson & B er­
n a rd  G rofm an eds., 1993). “In  V irginia, th e  black 
e lecto rate  w as reduced  from  147,000 to 21,000. In  
M ississippi, a fte r adoption of th e  post- 
R econstruction  constitu tion , 6% of eligible Blacks 
w ere reg is te red  to vote. One percen t of eligible A fri­
can-A m ericans w ere reg is tered  to vote in  A labam a 
by 1902, com pared w ith  75% of W hites.” D ayna L. 
C unningham , Who Are to Be the Electors? A  Reflec­
tion on the History of Voter Registration in the 
United States, 9 Yale L. & Pol’y Rev. 370, 380 (1991).



10
O ver th e  course of th e  20th  cen tu ry , th is  C ourt 

slowly in v a lid a ted  m any  of th e se  s ta te-sponsored  
d iscrim ina to ry  voting p ractices. N evertheless, s ta te s  
con tinued  to system atica lly  exclude B lacks from  th e  
political process. See, e.g., Dunn v. Blumstein, 405 
U.S. 330, 359-60 (1972) (s trik ing  down d u ra tio n a l 
residency  req u irem en ts  for vo te r reg is tra tio n  in  
Tennessee); Harper v. Va. State Bd. of Elections, 383 
U.S. 663, 666 (1966) (declaring poll tax es  a n  uncon­
s titu tio n a l v io lation  of th e  E qual P ro tec tion  Clause); 
Louisiana v. United States, 380 U .S. 145, 153 (1965) 
(s trik in g  down L o u isian a’s provision of an  “in te rp re ­
ta tio n  te s t” to prospective vo ters as  an  u n c o n stitu ­
tio n a l device designed  to d isen franch ise  Blacks); 
Sm ith v. Allwright, 321 U.S. 649, 656-57, 664-65 
(1944) (condem ning th e  D em ocratic P a r ty ’s p ractice  
of all-W hite p rim aries , w hich com pletely excluded 
B lacks from  th e  political process).

B. T h e  V o tin g  R ig h ts  A c t o f  1965 a b o l is h e d  
m a n y  o f  th e  b a r r i e r s  to  fu l l  p o l i t ic a l  p a r ­
t i c ip a t io n  fo r  v o te r s  o f  c o lo r .

M arch  7, 1965 w as a  tu rn in g  point, an d  a defin­
ing  m om ent for civil rig h ts  in  th is  N ation. T h a t day, 
m illions of A m ericans h a d  th e ir  te lev ision  p rogram s 
in te rru p te d  w ith  im ages of law  enforcem ent officers 
b ru ta lly  a ssa u ltin g  B lack m en, w om en, an d  ch ild ren  
on th e  E d m und  P e ttu s  B ridge in  Selm a, A labam a. 
The d em o n stra to rs  w ere peacefully  p ro tes tin g  a 
s ta te  tro o p e r’s k illing  of a  young B lack m an  d u ring  a 
vo te r re g is tra tio n  event. See D avid J . G arrow , Pro­
tests at Selma: M artin Luther King, Jr., and the Vot­
ing Rights Act of 1965 61-62 (1978). A w eek la te r, 
P res id en t Jo h n so n  delivered  a speech before a  spe­
cial jo in t session of Congress. He began:



11
I speak  to n ig h t for th e  d ignity  of m an  and  
th e  destiny  of Democracy. I u rge every 
m em ber of bo th  p a rtie s , A m ericans of all r e ­
ligions an d  of all colors, from  every section of 
th is  country , to jo in  me in  th a t. A t tim es, 
h is to ry  an d  fa te  m eet a t a single tim e in  a 
single place to shape  a tu rn in g  po in t in 
m an ’s u n end ing  search for freedom . So it 
w as a t Lexington an d  Concord. So it  w as a 
cen tu ry  ago a t  A ppom attox. So it w as la s t 
w eek in  Selm a, A labam a.

P res id en t Lyndon B. Johnson , A ddress to  Congress 
on th e  V oting R ights Act: We S hall Overcom e (Mar. 
15, 1965), available at w w w .historyplace.com /
speeches/johnson.htm .

P res id en t Jo h n so n  described th e  now -infam ous 
tactics  em ployed to p rev en t B lacks from  voting in  
th e  South, an d  he sh ared  h is  f irs t-h an d  experience 
w itnessing  d iscrim ina tion  ag a in s t M exican A m eri­
cans in  Texas. Id. He u rged  th e  passage  of a new 
voting rig h ts  act, b u t recognized: “even if we pass 
th is  bill th e  b a ttle  will no t be over.” Id.

C ongress responded  by enacting  th e  Voting 
R igh ts Act of 1965 (VRA), Pub. L. No. 89-110, 79 
S ta t. 937, a m ilestone in  “th e  strugg le  to end d is­
crim ina to ry  tre a tm e n t of m inorities who seek to ex­
ercise one of th e  m ost fu n d am en ta l rig h ts  of our c iti­
zens: th e  r ig h t to vote.” Bartlett v. Strickland, 556 
U.S. 1, 6 (2009). W idely regarded  as th e  crowning 
ach ievem ent of th e  Civil R ights M ovem ent, the  VRA 
h as  proven to be one of th e  m ost successful federal 
civil rig h ts  s ta tu te s , if not s ta tu te s  of any  kind, in  
A m erican  h istory .

http://www.historyplace.com/


12
As a re su lt of th e  VRA, B lack re g is tra tio n  ra te s  

rose d ram atica lly  and, consequently , th e  n u m b er of 
B lack elected  officials in  th is  coun try  in creased  
n early  fivefold w ith in  five y ears  a fte r its  passage. 
See H.R. Rep. No. 109-478, a t  18, 130 (2006), , re­
printed in 2006 U.S.C.C.A.N. 618. Today, th e re  a re  
over 9,000 B lack elected  officials. Id. a t  18. M ost of 
th ese  officials a re  elected from  d is tric ts  th a t  w ere 
c rea ted  or p ro tec ted  u n d e r th e  VRA to rem edy  th e  
d ilu tion  of th e  votes of com m unities of color. See 
C h an d ler D avidson & B ern ard  G rofm an, The Voting 
Rights Act and the Second Reconstruction, in Quiet 
Revolution in the South  378, 381-86 (C hand ler D a ­
vidson & B ern ard  G rofm an eds., 1993). S ignifi­
cantly , th e  VRA helped  lead  to th e  election an d  th e n  
th e  re-election  of th e  firs t B lack P res id en t of th e  
U n ited  S ta tes . See Sam  R oberts, 2008 Surge in 
Black Voters Nearly Erased Racial Gap, N.Y. Tim es, 
Ju ly  21, 2009, a t A14, available at
http://w w w .nytim es.com /
2009/07/21/us/polities/21vote.htm l; see also H a rry  J . 
E n ten , White Voter Decline in 2012: The Conundrum  
Behind the Cliche, The G u ard ian  (Nov. 9, 2012), 
available at
http ://w w w .guardian.co .uk/com m entisfree/2012/nov/ 
09/w hite-voter-decline-2012-conundrum .

A nd yet, w hile th e  VRA h as  proven to be a 
pow erful rem edy, voting d iscrim ination  h as  p e r­
sisted.

C. B la c k  r e g i s t r a t i o n  r a t e s  r e m a in e d  s ig ­
n i f i c a n t ly  lo w e r  t h a n  th o s e  o f  W h ite s  
e v e n  a f t e r  th e  e n a c tm e n t  o f  th e  VRA.

The VRA helped  to ra ise  B lack reg is tra tio n  ra te s  
in  th e  South  to 60 percen t by th e  la te  1980s. See Alt,

http://www.nytimes.com/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/


13
supra, a t 354 & 374. B u t even w ith  th is  pow erful 
tool, B lack reg is tra tio n  and  tu rn o u t ra te s  continued  
to lag  fa r beh ind  those of W hites.

In  th e  m id-1980s in  M ississippi, for exam ple, 
B lack reg is tra tio n  ra te s  w ere 25 percen tage poin ts 
below W hite reg is tra tio n  ra te s . Miss. State Chapter, 
Operation PU SH  v. Allain, 674 F. Supp. 1245, 1254- 
55 (N.D. M iss. 1987). In  th e  la te  1980s, people of 
color an d  th e  poor w ere overrep resen ted  am ong the  
47 p ercen t of eligible vo ters who rem ained  u n reg is­
te red . See C unningham , supra, a t 385 & n.97. V oter 
tu rn o u t for people of color also rem ained  extrem ely  
low, as only 37 percen t of eligible Black voters w ent 
to th e  polls in  1994. See N a th an  V. G em m iti, Note, 
Porsche or Pinto? The Impact of the “Motor Voter 
Registration A ct” on Black Political Participation, 18 
B.C. T h ird  W orld L .J. 71, 73 (1998).2

These low reg is tra tio n  an d  tu rn o u t ra te s  w ere a t ­
tr ib u tab le  in  p a r t to th e  res tric tive  reg is tra tio n  law s 
th a t  traced  th e ir  origins to th e  d iscrim inatory  law s 
described above. See, e.g., C unningham , supra, a t 
385-86 (“‘[R e g is tra tio n  req u irem en ts  a re  a  m ore ef­
fective d e te rre n t to voting th a n  an y th in g  th a t  n o r­
m ally op era tes  to d e te r citizens from voting once 
they  have reg istered , a t  le as t in  p res id en tia l elec­
tio n s .’”) (quoting S tan ley  Kelley e t al., Registration 
and Voting: Putting First Things First, 61 Am. Pol. 
Sci. Rev. 359, 362 (1967)). In  a  s tudy  published  in 
1980, 82 p ercen t of nonvoters explained th a t  they  
did no t vote because th ey  w ere not reg istered . Id. a t

2 S ta tes were not m andated to im plem ent the NVRA until 
1996. 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg; see also Gemmiti, supra, a t 96.



14
386 n.98 (citing W illiam  G rotty, The Franchise: Reg­
istration Changes and Voter Representation, in Paths 
to Political Reform  67, 524 (1980)).

Before th e  passage  of th e  NVRA, s ta tes , p a r tic u ­
la rly  in  th e  South, p roh ib ited  absen tee  vo ter reg is­
tra tio n , p e rm itted  only county re g is tra rs  or th e ir  
depu ties to reg is te r voters, lim ited  reg is tra tio n  to 
th e  le a s t convenient hou rs for p o ten tia l voters, and  
m a in ta in ed  re g is tra r  locations fa r from  w here m any  
voters lived. See, e.g., Alt, supra, a t 356 (“Even in  
1970, of th e  eleven so u th ern  s ta te s  only T ennessee 
an d  Texas h a d  any  provision for ab sen tee  re g is tra ­
tion, a lthough  tw enty-seven  of th e  th ir ty -n in e  n o n ­
so u th ern  s ta te s  h ad  such provisions.”); C unningham , 
supra, a t 386 & n.99 (noting th a t  “[i]n some ru ra l a r ­
eas w here only one site  is u sed  for vo ter reg is tra tio n , 
p o ten tia l vo ters . . . m u st trav e l d istances of over 100 
m iles to reg is te r”); Q uinlivan, supra, a t  2374-75 & 
n.93 (listing  s ta te s  th a t  give th e  local re g is tra rs  d is ­
cretion  to appo in t deputies; “th is  p ractice  re su lts  
m ore often in  g re a te r  pow er to in h ib it reg is tra tio n  
th a n  in  increases in  th e  ease of re g is tra tio n ”). To 
m ake m a tte rs  w orse, forty  s ta te s  and  th e  D istric t of 
Colum bia p e rm itted  purges of voters from  re g is tra ­
tion  rolls if those  voters did not p a rtic ip a te  in  a c e r­
ta in  num b er of p a s t elections. Id. a t  2374.

These b a rrie rs  to reg is tra tio n  d isp roportionate ly  
im pacted, an d  often w ere orig inally  in ten d ed  to t a r ­
get, vo ters of color an d  th e  poor, m any  of whom 
lacked access to tra n sp o rta tio n  to trav e l long d is ­
tances a t inconvenient tim es to reg is te r to vote. See 
L ani G uin ier, Keeping the Faith: Black Voters in the 
Post-Reagan Era, 24 H arv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 393, 
419-20 (1989). For in stance , th e  1980 C ensus found



15
th a t  42 p ercen t of B lacks, b u t only 9 pe rcen t of 
W hites, lacked access to tran sp o rta tio n  in  ru ra l A r­
k ansas. Id. a t 419 (citing U.S. D ep’t  of Commerce, 
B ureau  of th e  C ensus, S ta tis tica l A b strac ts  of the  
U.S. Table 96, A rk an sas  5-117-119 (1988)).3 M oreo­
ver, people of color an d  th e  poor re lied  m ore heavily  
th a n  W hites on vo ter reg is tra tio n  drives— w hich 
w ere disfavored in  m any  ju risd ic tions. See, e.g., 
NAACP, DeKalb Cnty. Chapter v. Georgia, 494 F. 
Supp. 668, 670 & n.2, 673 (N.D. Ga. 1980) (“D uring  
th e  m onth  of J a n u a ry , 1980, a t all D eKalb C ounty 
voter reg is tra tio n  sites, 2,700 people w ere reg istered . 
On th e  o th er hand , du ring  a one-day vo ter re g is tra ­
tion  drive conducted by p la in tiff League [of W omen 
Voters] . . . approx im ate ly  one an d  one-half tim es as 
m any people w ere reg is te red ”); cf. Alt, supra, a t  368 
(noting th a t, by 1968, 60 percen t of B lacks in so u th ­
ern  m ajority -m inority  counties v isited  by federal ex-

3 The discrim inatory im pact of those s ta te  reg istra tion  laws 
th a t required  voters to trave l long distances to reg ister to vote 
is strikingly sim ilar to th a t of Texas’s voter photo identification 
law, which was rejected by a federal d istrict court because it, 
among other things, required  some ru ra l voters to travel dis­
tances of over 200 miles to obtain acceptable identification. 
Texas v. Holder, No. 12-128, 2012 WL 3743676, a t *27-29 
(D.D.C. Aug. 30, 2012). A three-judge panel refused to preclear 
the law under section 5 of the VRA, id. a t *1, finding th a t 13.1 
percent of Blacks and 7.3 percent of Latinos lived in  households 
w ithout access to a motor vehicle, compared w ith only 3.8 per­
cent of whites. Id. a t *29. “If traveling over 200 miles consti­
tu tes a substan tia l burden  on people w ithout driver’s licenses 
who can nonetheless find a ride to a [D epartm ent of Public 
Safety] office, . . . im agine the burden for the  predom inantly  
m inority population whose households lack access to any car a t 
all.” Id.



16
am iners  w ere reg is te red  to vote, w hereas only 28 
percen t of B lacks w ere reg is te red  in  sim ilar, b u t u n ­
v isited  counties).

F inally , purges of vo ter reg is tra tio n  lis ts  also d is­
p roportionately  affected vo ters of color an d  th e  poor 
because th ey  w ere m ore likely  to be inactive voters, 
to move in ter-coun ty  betw een  elections, or to be u n ­
der-educated  and, th u s , less likely  to respond  to le t ­
te rs  req u estin g  th a t  th ey  u p d a te  th e ir  reg is tra tio n . 
See S. Rep. No. 103-6, a t  17-20 (1993) (recognizing 
th a t  pu rges of nonvoters h ad  a d isp a ra te  im pact on 
m inorities); C unningham , supra, a t 391-95 (d iscuss­
ing illiteracy  and  local m obility’s re la tio n sh ip  to d is ­
crim ina to ry  purges of voter rolls).

VRA litiga tion  successfully challenged some, b u t 
no t all, of th ese  reg is tra tio n  b a rrie rs . See, e.g., Miss. 
State Chapter, Operation Push, Inc. v. Mabus, 932 
F .2d 400, 401, 412-13 (5th  Cir. 1991) (affirm ing a 
d is tric t co u rt’s finding  th a t  M ississipp i’s dual reg is­
tra tio n  system  an d  prohib ition  on sa te llite  re g is tra ­
tion  violated  th e  VRA and  affirm ing th e  steps ta k en  
by th e  d is tric t court to  cure those  violations); see also 
NAACP, DeKalb Cnty. Chapter, 494 F. Supp. a t 673, 
676, 679 (holding th a t  DeKalb C ounty’s re fu sa l to 
allow th e  p la in tiff-nonprofits to opera te  sa te llite  
vo ter reg is tra tio n  sites beyond th e  county  re g is tra r’s 
office w as subject to th e  p rec learance  req u irem en t of 
th e  VRA; an d  tem p o rarily  enjoining th e  county  from  
blocking fu r th e r  th ird -p a r ty  reg is tra tio n  drives). 
D uring  th e  sam e period, m any  in  C ongress recog­
nized th a t  b roader, m ore m eaningful voter re g is tra ­
tion  law s w ere needed, and  over th e  nex t 20 years 
in troduced  m ore th a n  44 reform  bills. See C unn ing ­
ham , supra, a t  387-88 (discussing th e  various pro-



17
posed bills); G em m iti, supra, a t  89-94 (describing ef­
fo rts to enac t vo ter reg is tra tio n  reform ).

II . C o n g re s s  e n a c te d  th e  N V RA  in  r e s p o n s e  to  
p e r s i s t i n g  d i s c r im in a to r y  v o t in g  la w s  a n d  
to  e q u a l iz e  a c c e s s  to  v o te r  r e g i s t r a t io n .

F inally , a fte r num erous a ttem p ts  to expand  the  
e lec to ra te  an d  add ress longstand ing  an d  w idespread  
d iscrim ination  in  th e  vo ter reg is tra tio n  context, R ep­
re sen ta tiv e  A1 Swift (D-WA) in troduced  th e  NVRA in  
1993. See Voter Registration: Hearing Held Before 
the H. Subcomm. on Elections, Comm, on H. Admin., 
103rd Cong. 1-2 (1993) (s ta tem en t of Rep. Swift). 
R ep resen ta tiv e  Swift, who au th o red  th e  NVRA, ex­
p la ined  th e  b ill’s purpose as:

th e  e rad ica tion  of a ra th e r  u n fo rtu n a te  t r a d i­
tion  in  th is  country . We have used  voter re g ­
is tra tio n  m echanism s in  th e  U n ited  S ta tes  
th ro u g h o u t m any, m any  decades to p rev en t 
various groups who w ere from  tim e to tim e 
an d  by ce rta in  groups considered u n d e s ir­
able, to m ake it very  difficult for them  to 
vote. A t various tim es those  have been  e a s t­
e rn  E uropeans an d  so u th ern  E uropeans, th e  
Irish , A frican-A m ericans, an d  others.

139 Cong. Rec. H505, H506 (daily ed. Feb. 4, 1993) 
(s ta tem en t of Rep. Swift).

A. T h e  N V RA  is  a  c iv il  r ig h t s  s t a t u t e  d e ­
s ig n e d  to  in c r e a s e  v o te r  r e g i s t r a t i o n  
a m o n g  p e o p le  o f  c o lo r  a n d  th e  p o o r .

The NVRA sought to e lim ina te  b a rrie rs  to reg is­
tra tio n  an d  to affirm atively  “increase th e  num ber of 
eligible citizens who reg is te r to vote in  elections for



18
F ed era l office.” 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg(b)(l). I t  w as also 
adopted  as a  special effort to reach  “th e  poor and  
persons w ith  d isab ilities who do not have d riv e r’s li­
censes an d  will no t come in to  contact w ith  [motor 
vehicle agencies].” H.R. Rep. No. 103-66, a t  19 
(1993) (Conf. Rep.), reprinted in 1993 U.S.C.C.A.N. 
140.

In  p a rticu la r, th e  NVRA req u ires  s ta te s  to m ake 
reg is tra tio n  available: (1) “by app lication  m ade s i­
m u ltaneously  w ith  an  app lication  for a m otor vehicle 
d riv e r’s license,” 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-2(a)(l); (2) “by 
m ail app lication” u sin g  th e  F edera l Form  prescribed  
by th e  Election A ssistance C om m ission (EAC), 42 
U.S.C. §§ 1973gg-2(a)(2), 1973gg-4; an d  (3) “by ap p li­
cation  in  person” a t  s ites designa ted  in  accordance 
w ith  s ta te  law  or s ta te  vo ter reg is tra tio n  agencies, 
id. § 1973gg-2(a)(3). The F ed era l Form — a n a tio n ­
ally  uniform  vo ter app lication  th a t  ap p lican ts  can 
use to reg is te r by m ail, id. §§ 1973gg-4, 1973gg- 
7(a)(2)—w as in  p a r t designed  to fac ilita te  re g is tra ­
tion  drives.

Section 7 of th e  NVRA sets fo rth  fu r th e r  obliga­
tions of c e rta in  s ta te  offices as “vo ter reg is tra tio n  
agencies.” H.R. Rep. No. 103-66, a t  18-20; see also 
42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-5. Section 7(a)(6) of the  NVRA 
req u ires  all s ta te  offices th a t  provide M edicaid, food 
stam ps, an d  o th er public ass is tan ce  benefits, to p ro ­
vide th e ir  clients “a m ail vo ter reg is tra tio n  app lica­
tion  form ,” an d  ass is tan ce  com pleting th e  voter re g ­
is tra tio n  form, “w ith  each app lication  for [public] 
service or assistance , an d  w ith  each recertification , 
renew al, or change of add ress form  re la tin g  to such 
service or ass is tan ce .” 42 U.S.C. § 1973gg-5(a)(6). 
The NVRA, w hich passed  w ith  b road  b ip a rtisa n  sup-



19
port and  w as signed in to  law  by P res id en t Bill C lin ­
ton  on M ay 20, 1993, G em m iti, supra, a t  95-96, also 
estab lish ed  lim ita tions on vo ter purges. See 42 
U.S.C. § 1973gg-6(d).

S ignificantly , in  pass in g  th e  NVRA, Congress 
recognized th a t  “discrim inato ry  an d  u n fa ir  re g is tra ­
tion  law s an d  procedures can have a d irect and d am ­
aging  effect on vo ter pa rtic ip a tio n  in  elections for 
F ed era l office and  d isp roportionate ly  h a rm  voter 
p a rtic ip a tio n  by various groups, including rac ia l m i­
n o rities .” Id. § 1973gg(a)(3). In  th a t  sp irit, C ongress 
took steps to en su re  th a t  th e  NVRA could not be 
u sed  by s ta te s  to en ac t d iscrim inato ry  law s, like A ri­
zona’s P roposition  200. In  th e  Jo in t H ouse-S enate  
Conference, m em bers of Congress expressly  re jected  
language from  th e  bill th a t  would have given s ta te s  
th e  pow er to requ ire  ind iv iduals to provide docum en­
ta ry  proof of citizensh ip  in  o rder to reg is te r to vote. 
See G em m iti, supra, a t  95 n.252 (citing R ichard  
Sam m on, Deal May Speed Up “Motor Voter,” Cong. 
Q. Wkly. Rep., M ay 1, 1993, a t  1080).

B. V o te r  r e g i s t r a t i o n  r a t e s  a m o n g  p e o p le  o f  
c o lo r  h a v e  in c r e a s e d  s ig n i f ic a n t ly  a s  a  
r e s u l t  o f  th e  NVRA.

As in ten d ed  by Congress, vo ter reg is tra tio n  in ­
creased  d ram atica lly  following th e  NVRA’s passage, 
w ith  20 m illion new  re g is tra n ts , 9 m illion of whom 
w ere Black, being added  to th e  vo ter reg is tra tio n  
rolls betw een 1995 an d  Ju n e  1996. See R obert 
Brow n & J u s tin  W edeking, People Who Have Their 
Tickets But Do Not Use Them: “Motor Voter,” Regis­
tration, and Turnout Revisited, 34 Am. Pol. Res. 479, 
484-87 (2006); G em m iti, supra, a t  97. W idely recog­
n ized  for its  pivotal role in  u sh erin g  in  a new  period



20

of dem ocratic expansion  in  th is  country , th e  NVRA 
led to sign ifican t im provem ents in  d isp aritie s  in  re g ­
is tra tio n  ra te s  betw een people of color an d  W hites. 
See G em m iti, supra , a t 97.

Efforts to enforce th e  NVRA in  s ta te s  have also 
led to d ram atic  increases in  voter reg is tra tio n  in  
m ore recen t years. In  2004, for exam ple, Iowa im ­
proved its  agency-based vo ter reg is tra tio n  an d  expe­
rienced  a  700 percen t increase  in  reg is tra tio n s  over 
th e  previous p re s id en tia l election cycle as well as a 
3,000 percen t increase  over th e  previous year. See 
E stelle  H. Rogers, The National Voter Registration 
Act: Fifteen Years On 2 (2009), available at 
w w w .acslaw .org/sites/default/files/Rogers_- 
_NVR A _at_ 15. p df.

O th er s ta tes , how ever, have sought to f ru s tra te  
th e  d ic ta tes of th e  NVRA, th ro u g h  m easu res s im ila r 
to A rizona’s P roposition  200, an d  have been  req u ired  
to comply w ith  th e  s ta tu te  by court order. M issouri, 
for exam ple, w as com pelled by a d is tric t court to 
comply w ith  th e  NVRA. Id. Following th e  im p le­
m en ta tio n  of th e  court order, s ta te  public assis tance  
agencies collected 26,000 voter reg is tra tio n  app lica­
tions in  ju s t six w eeks. Id.

A nd ju s t  la s t  year, LD F won p a rtia l sum m ary  
ju d g m en t in  a challenge to L ou isiana’s fa ilu re  to 
comply w ith  th e  NVRA, w ith  a  court holding th a t  th e  
NVRA req u ires  th a t  all public ass is tance  c lien ts be 
provided w ith  a vo ter reg is tra tio n  application, 
w h e th er th ey  seek benefits  in  person  or rem otely  by 
th e  in te rn e t, te lephone, or m ail. Ferrand v. Sched- 
ler, No. 11-926, 2012 WL 1570094, a t  *12 (E.D. La. 
M ay 3, 2012). In  L ouisiana, reg is tra tio n s  from  
public ass is tan ce  agencies h ad  p lum m eted  88 per-

http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Rogers_-_NVR
http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Rogers_-_NVR


21
cent since th e  NVRA w as firs t im plem ented , from  
75,000 in  1995 to 1996 to  a m ere 9,000 in  2007 to 
2008. See P is .’ Proposed F ind ings of Fact, Proposed 
Conclusions of Law, an d  Proposed In junctive R em ­
edy a t  10, Scott v. Schedler, No. 11-926 (E.D. La. Oct. 
5, 2012), EC F No. 372. A fter LD F filed th is  law suit, 
how ever, vo ter reg is tra tio n s  th ro u g h  public a ss is ­
tance  offices spiked, w ith  th e  n u m b er of new  reg is ­
tra tio n s  increasing  as m uch as sevenfold from  p rev i­
ous years. See id. a t  8-9.

In  recen t years, th e  U.S. D ep artm en t of Ju stice  
h a s  also filed a  n u m b er of law su its  u n d e r th e  NVRA. 
See, e.g., United States v. Florida, 870 F. Supp. 2d 
1346, 1350-51 (N.D. Fla. 2012) (finding th a t  a voter 
purge p rogram  in  F lorida “probably  ra n  afoul” of th e  
NVRA insofar as it  iden tified  m any  citizens as po­
te n tia l noncitizens); United States v. Louisiana, No. 
11-470, 2011 W L 6012992, a t  *6 (M.D. La. Dec. 1, 
2011) (denying in  p a r t  th e  s ta te ’s m otion to dism iss 
claim s th a t  it  failed  to offer reg is tra tio n  a t  public a s ­
s istance  agencies); C onsent Decree, United States v. 
Rhode Island, No. 11-113S (D.R.I. M ar. 25, 2011), 
EC F No. 3 (consent decree req u irin g  s ta te  officials 
to en su re  th a t  vo ter reg is tra tio n  opportun ities are  
offered a t  a ll s ta te  public ass is tan ce  and  d isab ility  
services offices); C onsent D ecree, United States v. 
Tennessee, No 02-0938 (M.D. Tenn. Oct 16, 2002) 
(m an d a tin g  th a t  s ta te  officials develop an d  im ple­
m en t uniform  vo ter reg is tra tio n  application  proce­
dures and  an n u a l NVRA tra in in g s  for em ployees of 
s ta te  d riv e r’s licenses an d  public services offices). 
N otably, in  2008, a fte r th e  U.S. D ep artm en t of J u s ­
tice ra ised  concerns abou t th e  A rizona D ep artm en t 
of Economic Security ’s com pliance w ith  Section 7,



22
th e  p a rtie s  en te red  in to  an  ag reem en t estab lish in g  
s tan d a rd s  to en su re  th e  p roper im p lem en ta tio n  of 
th e  NVRA. See Agreement Between the United 
States Department of Justice and the Arizona De­
partment of Economic Security Concerning S tan­
dards and Monitoring of Compliance with the N a­
tional Voter Registration Act of 1993 (M ay 15, 2008), 
h ttp  ://www .justice . gov/crt/about/vot/nvr a/ az_nvra_m  
oa.php.

The p ro m in en t role th a t  th e  NVRA h a s  p layed in  
in creasing  reg is tra tio n  and  tu rn o u t ra te s  am ong low- 
incom e voters, who a re  d isp roportionate ly  persons of 
color, is significant. B etw een 2007 an d  2010, an  a s ­
to n ish ing  one m illion low-income people in  five dif­
fe ren t s ta te s  reg is te red  to vote as a re su lt  of NVRA 
enforcem ent. See Youjin B. K im  & L isa  D anetz, 
Demos, 1 Million New Voters Among the 99%: How 
Agency-Based Voter Registration Gives Low-Income 
Americans a Voice in Democracy (2011), available at 
http ://w w w .dem os.org /sites/default/files/publications/ 
M ilhonJV IarkJD em os.pdf.

III. A r izo n a ’s P r o p o s it io n  200 is  in c o n s is te n t
w ith  an d  p r e em p te d  b y  th e  N a tio n a l V o ter
R e g is tr a t io n  A ct.

N o tw ith stan d in g  th e  long, exclusive, an d  sad  h is ­
to ry  of voting d iscrim ination  in  response to w hich 
Congress enacted  th e  NVRA, an d  th e  im p o rtan t 
s trid es  tow ard  equality  in  th e  voter reg is tra tio n  
process th a t  th e  NVRA h as  occasioned, A rizona h as  
sought to re tu rn  to th e  pre-NVRA e ra— an d  even th e  
pre-VRA e ra —by m ounting  an  a ssa u lt on th e  voting 
rig h ts  of people of color, an d  L atinos in  p a rticu la r, 
th ro u g h  Proposition  200.

http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/


23
As no ted  earlie r, betw een  2000 an d  2010, the  

n u m b er of L atinos in  A rizona grew  significantly , by 
alm ost 600,000, from  less th a n  1.3 m illion to  a p ­
prox im ate ly  1.9 million. The State of the Right to 
Vote After the 2012 Election: Hearing Before the S. 
Comm, on the Judiciary, 112th  Cong. (2012) (s ta te ­
m en t of N ina  P era les, Vice P res id en t of L itigation, 
M exican A m erican Legal D efense an d  E ducational 
Fund) [here inafte r Senate Hearing] a t  1 , available at 
h ttp  ://www. j ud ic ia ry . senate , go v/pdf/12-12- 
19PeralesT estim ony.pdf. L atinos now com prise 30 
percen t of th e  s ta te ’s population . Id. In  response to 
th is  dem ographic tren d , A rizona voters, citing  a need  
to com bat undocum ented  im m igration , adopted  
Proposition  200, a d iscrim inato ry  m easu re  th a t  r e ­
qu ires  county re g is tra rs  to “reject any  application  for 
reg is tra tio n  th a t  is not accom panied by satisfac to ry  
evidence of U n ited  S ta te s  citizensh ip .” Ariz. Rev. 
S ta t. § 16-166(F).

For its  p a rt, A rizona failed  to identify  a single in ­
stance  in  w hich an  undocum ented  im m ig ran t reg is­
te re d  or voted in  th e  s ta te . Senate Hearing, supra, 
a t  3 (s ta tem en t of Perales). The im pact of th e  law 
w as significant, how ever. Following the  en ac tm en t 
of P roposition  200, A rizona re jected  th e  reg is tra tio n  
app lications of m ore th a n  30,000 indiv iduals. See 
Gonzalez v. Arizona, No. 06-1268, slip op. a t  13 (D. 
Ariz. Aug. 20, 2008). N early  17 p ercen t of those r e ­
jected  w ere Latinos, a figure m easu rab ly  h igher th a n  
th e  a lm ost 14 percen t of L atinos in  th e  o rig inal reg ­
is tra tio n  app lican t pool. See id.

Proposition  200 is foreclosed by th e  NVRA. See 
Gonzalez v. Arizona, Q ll F .3d 383, 388 (9th  Cir. 
2012) (en banc). As d iscussed above, Congress en-



24
su red  th a t  th e  NVRA could no t be u sed  by s ta te s  to 
enac t d iscrim ina to ry  law s, like A rizona’s P roposition  
200. C ongress specifically re jected  language in  th e  
b ill th a t  would have given s ta te s  th e  pow er to  selec­
tively  req u ire  ind iv idua ls  to provide docum entary  
proof of citizensh ip  in  o rder to  reg is te r to vote. See 
G em m iti, supra , a t 95 n.252 (citing Sam m on, supra, 
a t 1080). In  so doing, C ongress also sought to p re ­
v en t s ta te s  from  d iscrim ina ting  ag a in s t vo ters w ith  
“foreign sounding” nam es. Id.

The NVRA’s p reem ption  of d iscrim inato ry  m eas­
u res  like P roposition  200 is especially  im p o rtan t for 
L atinos in  A rizona, who com prise th e  s ta te ’s fastest- 
grow ing c itizen  voting-age population  an d  who are  
engulfed in  an  often h ea ted  debate  about im m ig ran ts  
from  Mexico living in  th e  s ta te . Senate Hearing, su­
pra, a t  3 (s ta tem en t of P erales). As L atinos in  A ri­
zona, and  people of color m ore broadly, s trive  to 
overcome th e  effects of p a s t exclusion from  th e  po­
litical process, m easu res like P roposition  200 u n ­
derm ine th a t  effort. F o rtu n ate ly , th e  C ourt of A p­
peals, s ittin g  en banc, s tru ck  down Proposition  200, 
correctly  recognizing th a t  it  w as bo th  inconsisten t 
w ith  an d  p reem pted  by th e  NVRA. Gonzalez, 677 
F.3d a t  388.

D em ocracy in  A m erica is con tested  an d  h as  been  
ch arac te rized  by periods of p rogress an d  re tre n c h ­
m ent. For n early  a cen tu ry  before th e  en ac tm en t of 
th e  VRA an d  NVRA, m any  ju risd ic tions held  tigh tly  
to d iscrim inato ry  p ractices th a t  excluded people of 
color from  equal political p artic ipa tion . The NVRA 
u sh ered  in  a period of dem ocratic expansion  and  h as  
been  ex trao rd in a rily  effective a t  leading  our n a tio n  
tow ard  becom ing a  m ore inclusive democracy. Ari-



25
zona’s P roposition  200, an d  o th er s im ila r efforts th a t  
recall th e  d iscrim inato ry  law s of th e  la s t century , 
th re a te n  to u n d erm ine  th e  hard -fough t p rogress of 
th e  la s t  fifty years.

C O N C L U S IO N

For all of th e  reasons above, and  those  advocated 
by R espondents, we respectfu lly  req u est th a t  th e  de­
cision of th e  C ourt of A ppeals be affirm ed.

R espectfully  S ubm itted ,

D ebo P. Adegbile  
Acting President &
Director-Counsel 

Elise  C. Boddie 
Ryan P. Haygood 

Counsel of Record 
NAACP L egal D e fe n se  & 
E ducational F u n d , In c .

99 H udson S tree t, 16th FI. 
New York, NY 10013 
(212) 965-2200 
rhaygood@ naacpldf.org

J oshua  Civin  
NAACP L egal D e fe n se  & 

Educational F u n d , In c . 
1444 I St., NW, 10th  FI. 
W ashington, DC 20005

M ichael  B. de Leeuw  
D eu el  R oss 
V ictorien  Wu 
F r ie d , F rank , Ha rris , 
Shriver  & J acobson  LLP

mailto:rhaygood@naacpldf.org


26
One New Y ork P laza  
New York, NY 10004

J erom e Gotkin  
M ichael  Arnold  
M intz L evin  Cohen  

F erris Glovskyand  
P o pe o , P.C.

666 T h ird  A venue 
New York, NY 10017

Wade H enderson  
L isa  M. Bornstein  
L ea d ersh ip  Co n feren ce  

on Civil and H uman 
R ights

1629 K S tree t, NW, 10th FI. 
W ashington , DC 20006

Steven  M. F reem an  
Lauren  A. J ones 
J u stin e  K. Fanarof 
An t i-Defam ation  L eague 
605 T h ird  A venue 
New York, NY 10158

J a n u a ry  22, 2013