RNC asks Supreme Court to weigh in on Arizona voting restrictions

The Republican National Committee (RNC) asked the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and reinstate key parts of Arizona laws meant to restrict voting.

In a petition filed Thursday, the RNC urged the Court to overturn a sweeping ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that blocked Arizona’s “proof-of-citizenship” requirement and placed limits on removing voters from the rolls close to an election.

At stake is whether Arizona can demand documentary proof of citizenship — such as a U.S. passport or birth certificate — from people who use the state’s voter registration form, and whether county officials can cancel registrations of ‘suspected’ noncitizens within 90 days of a federal election.

In its petition to SCOTUS, the RNC framed the case as a defense of state power.

“Arizona, like every State, permits only U.S. citizens to vote in its elections,” the RNC wrote. “That decision is rooted in the States’ exclusive authority to set voter qualifications for state and federal elections. But ‘the power to establish voting requirements is of little value without the power to enforce those requirements.’”

The appeal marks the latest escalation in a years-long fight over Arizona’s voting laws — and part of a broader GOP push to restrict the voting access of eligible voters under the banner of election integrity, even as documented instances of noncitizen voting remain vanishingly rare.

“Over two decades ago, Arizona voters overwhelmingly approved a commonsense law requiring documentary proof of citizenship to vote,” RNC Chairman Joe Gruters said in a press release. “It is unacceptable that, more than 20 years later, the RNC must still step in to defend the clear will of Arizonans against the Democratic Party and leftist advocacy groups. Federal law is clear: only U.S. citizens have the right to vote in American elections. The RNC will never stop fighting to protect our democracy and the integrity of every Arizona voter’s ballot.”

In 2024, a federal district court struck down major provisions of two Arizona laws passed in 2022. Those measures required people registering with the state form to provide documentary proof of citizenship and authorized election officials to cancel registrations if they had a vague “reason to believe” someone was not a U.S. citizen.

Voting rights groups, Native American tribes and Democratic organizations sued, arguing the laws violated the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) — the federal law that governs voter registration for federal elections — and breached a 2018 consent decree that Arizona officials had entered into in prior litigation.

The Ninth Circuit agreed, holding that Arizona’s ‘proof-of-citizenship’ rule conflicted with federal law and that the state could not run a systematic program removing voters within 90 days of a federal election — often called the NVRA’s “quiet period,” designed to prevent mass purges right before voters head to the polls.

The panel also concluded that a prior settlement — known as the LULAC consent decree — barred Arizona officials from rejecting state registration forms that lacked documentary proof.

In its petition, the RNC accused the Ninth Circuit of overreach and defiance.

“[I]gnoring the Supreme Court’s direction,” the filing states, “the [Ninth Circuit] panel concluded that Arizona’s proof-of-citizenship laws violate the 2018 LULAC consent decree.” 

It also leaned heavily on dissenting judges who blasted the ruling, quoting one who wrote that “the majority opinion is profoundly wrong.”

The ‘proof of citizenship’ fight

The first question presented before the Court by the RNC is whether the NVRA prevents Arizona from requiring documentary proof of citizenship when someone registers using the state’s form.

Under current practice, Arizona runs a two-track system. 

Voters who register using the federal form can vote in federal elections even if they do not provide documentary proof of citizenship. Those who use the state form must provide proof of citizenship to vote in state and local elections.

The 2022 law went further, tightening proof requirements and linking them to access to presidential voting and mail-in ballots.

The RNC argues the Ninth Circuit misread federal law.

“The panel’s finding that the NVRA preempts the proof-of-citizenship requirement fares no better,” the petition states. “This Court has recognized that ‘state-developed forms may require information the Federal Form does not.’”

Voting rights advocates counter that requiring documents many eligible voters do not readily have — including some elderly, rural and Native American voters — risks disenfranchising citizens in the name of combating a problem that evidence shows is exceedingly rare.

The voter purge fight 

The second issue centers on the NVRA’s 90-day rule. Federal law bars states from conducting systematic voter roll purges within 90 days of a federal election to prevent errors that could wrongly knock eligible voters off the rolls.

The Ninth Circuit held that Arizona’s program of checking databases and canceling registrations of suspected noncitizens fell within that prohibition.

The RNC argues the law does not protect people who were never eligible to vote in the first place.

“Turning to the second question, the NVRA does not insulate noncitizens against removal from voter rolls.” the petition says.“It does not extend its protections to noncitizens who were never qualified to vote, and thus who cannot be ‘eligible applicants’ or ‘registrants.’”

The party warned that the Ninth Circuit ruling would create “far-reaching and absurd consequences” by shielding noncitizens from removal close to an election.

Voting rights advocates, meanwhile, see it as a guardrail against last-minute, error-prone purges that disproportionately affect naturalized citizens and voters of color.

The Supreme Court previously granted partial emergency relief in the case before the 2024 election, temporarily allowing one proof-of-citizenship provision to take effect. The Court allowed the state to require documentary proof of citizenship for voters registering using the state’s form.

Now, the RNC is asking the Court to take the case on the merits — meaning full briefing and argument.

If the Supreme Court agrees to hear it, the decision could ripple far beyond Arizona, shaping how aggressively GOP-led states can demand documentary proof of citizenship and how freely they can scrub voters from the rolls right before elections.

The Court is expected to decide in the coming months whether it will take up the case.