Impact

Arizona Citizenship Document (2013)

Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona et al.

Challenging Arizona law that required voter registration officials to reject any registration application that was not accompanied by documentary evidence of citizenship.

Impact

Arizona Ballot Collection

DNC v. Hobbs

In 2016, the DNC, DSCC and others challenged two provisions of Arizona law: (1) a 2016 law that criminalized the practice of ballot collection, and (2) Arizona’s wholesale rejection of ballots cast in the wrong precinct. The Ninth Circuit held that the law was enacted with the intent to discriminate against minority voters, and struck down Arizona’s practice of entirely discarding ballots cast in the wrong precinct.

Active Cases

Arizona Signature Mismatch

Arizona Democratic Party v. Hobbs

On behalf of the DNC, DSCC, and Arizona Democratic Party, we challenged Arizona’s failure to provide an opportunity to cure an otherwise valid mail ballot that doesn’t have a signature. The current version of Arizona’s Elections Procedures Manual treats mail in ballots differently: if a signature does not match, the voter has a cure period extending five days after the election, but if there is no signature the ballot will not be counted. We asked the state to give all vote by mail voters the same opportunity to cure a missing or mismatched signature.

Impact

Arizona Mail Ballot Deadline

Voto Latino v. Hobbs

Challenging Arizona over its mail ballot deadline law and practice that systematically disenfranchise voters in general and Hispanic and Latino voters in particular. Arizona requires ballots to be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day. The Election Day Receipt Deadline has particularly profound implications for Arizona’s Hispanic and Latino voters. In rural counties Hispanic and Latino voters are five to six times more likely to be disenfranchised than white voters. We settled with the state, who agreed to expand early voting and outreach efforts to these communities.