ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Arizona

Justice

Surprise! Justice Scalia Strikes Down Arizona Law Requiring Proof Of Citizenship To Register To Vote

In an opinion by conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, a 7-2 Supreme Court held this morning that an Arizona law requiring voting officials to reject voter registration forms that are “not accompanied by concrete evidence of citizenship” conflicts with a federal law requiring states to use a uniform voter registration form for federal elections. Scalia once justified an anti-immigrant opinion with a reference to laws excluding “freed blacks” from southern states, and he called the Voting Rights Act a “perpetuation of racial entitlement. So his authorship of this opinion is both unexpected and a sign of the weakness of Arizona’s legal position in defending this law.

The Court’s opinion in this case, Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, also establishes an important doctrinal rule regarding the power of Congress to push back against state election laws. The Constitution permits duly enacted federal laws to trump state law, a process known as “preemption.” Normally, however, courts should apply a presumption against preemption and assume that Congress did not intend to invalidate state law if the matter is uncertain. Scalia’s opinion holds that this presumption does not apply with respect to federal laws regulating federal elections, a holding which suggests Congress’ power to sweep away state election laws is quite sweeping.

As the Court points out, this broad view of the federal role in governing elections is consistent with the Constitution’s text, which provides that “[t]he times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations.” So a future Congress more supportive of voting rights has the power to sweep away voter ID laws and other methods of voter suppression that have recently popped up mostly in conservative states. By contrast, a future Congress more keen to voter suppression may have significant authority to impose its will on the nation, although this power would be checked by constitutional safeguards against many forms of voter suppression.

Scalia’s opinion is not, however, a total victory over Arizona’s attempt to make voter registration more difficult. Rather, the final section of his opinion suggests that Arizona could renew a request to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to incorporate the state’s proof-of-citizenship requirement into the voter registration form, and that they could challenge any denial of this request in court. For the meantime, however, Arizona’s requirement is invalid.

Health

Arizona Legislature Advances Medicaid Expansion, Extending Health Coverage To 50,000 Poor Americans

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) (Credit: Shutterstock)

Faced with enormous political pressure from Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ), the Arizona House passed a budget and Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in a rare 3:40 a.m. vote on Thursday. The bills now go back to the state Senate — where they are expected to pass easily later this morning — for final approval before heading to Brewer’s desk for her signature.

The vote signifies the final skirmish in a five-month long battle to expand Medicaid that pit the combative Brewer against members of her own party and conservative constituents. The window for passing the expansion and a budget would have closed on July 1st. With that deadline looming, Brewer called a surprise, special legislative session on Tuesday without getting permission from — or even informing — lawmakers in her party.

Studies by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) have shown that expanding Medicaid will cut Arizona’s uninsurance rate by nearly third. That means approximately 50,000 low-income Arizonans will be covered for medical benefits such as doctor’s visits, prescription drugs for chronic conditions like diabetes, and mental health care services.

Brewer made expanding Arizona’s Medicaid program under the health law a top priority for this legislative session. After becoming the third GOP governor to endorse expansion in January, she held rallies throughout the state meant to shore up support for the controversial Obamacare measure, and implored Republican moderates to vote for it. Brewer often used personal rhetoric that emphasized the consequences failing to expand Medicaid would have on Arizona’s poor. “The human cost of this tragedy can’t be calculated,” she said during a rally in March.

Thursday’s victory came only after significant tensions threatened to derail the entire process. Brewer played political hardball to push the expansion, even following through on a threat to shut down lawmaking entirely until she had a budget and the Medicaid expansion bill on her desk. She refused to compromise with Republican House Speaker Andy Tobin, who had proposed a far more conservative alternative plan that would have put a time limit on how long poor Arizona residents could qualify for the expanded program.

The tough tactics earned her scathing reviews from conservatives, with the chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee calling her a “rogue governor.” Republican lawmakers who opposed the expansion also slammed Brewer for her aggressive methods in speeches on the House floor Thursday.

Arizona will now be the 21st state to expand Medicaid under Obamacare.

Immigration

In One Week, Arizona Police Rescue More Than 30 Border-Crossers From The Desert Heat

(Credit: Shutterstock)

Over thirty undocumented people had to be rescued by Arizona police this week after trying to make the treacherous hike across the border through the blazing Arizona desert, according to an Arizona ABC affiliate. In fact, on Monday afternoon, the office of Maricopa County, AZ Sheriff Joe Arpaio was in a race against time to save another group, weak and thirsty, who were stranded by their ‘coyote’ — someone people will pay to guide them across the border — at some unknown location within the confines of an Air Force base:

“He said his guide left the group and never returned. The others were too weak to walk, so he walked to the I-8 and called 911,” said MCSO Deputy Juan Francisco Silva.

Deputies believe the group is somewhere on the Air Force base in Gila Bend. The base is doing active training, making the search dangerous because live missiles are being dropped. Deputies want to get them out of there before they are put in any more danger.

“We have to make the effort. There are human beings out there and they are asking for help,” Silva said.

Since 2001, more than 2,100 border crossers have died in the Sonoran Desert in Arizona. As the country spends more and more on border security, migrants aren’t deterred from trying to enter. People risk huge harm not just from the elements, but also rape and robbery, to come for jobs, or to be reunited with friends or relatives. And as border security becomes tougher and tougher — there are 21,370 border patrol agents and 1,200 national guard troops at the border, along with 6 unmanned aircraft and huge amounts of mobile and mounted surveillance — migrants become increasingly likely to remain permanently in the US.

ABC attributes a rise in calls for help to increased cellphone usage by undocumented people who are crossing the border. It also corresponds to the growing number of central Americans crossing into Arizona. That isn’t the overall trend: Net undocumented immigration is at or below zero, and illegal crossings are at their lowest level in almost four decades. Arizona’s increased crossings likely come from deadly massacres at the Mexican side of the Texas border, diverting migrants to other states.

Health

Arizona GOP House Speaker Caves Under Pressure From Governor, Schedules Vote On Medicaid Expansion

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R)

Under pressure from Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ), who is refusing to sign any laws until her party expands Medicaid under Obamacare, Arizona’s Republican House Speaker Andy Tobin surrendered his fight to block the governor’s expansion proposal on Tuesday. Tobin was pushing for a more conservative plan that would have put a time limit on how long poor Arizonans could qualify for the expanded Medicaid pool.

Now, the governor’s preferred proposal — which passed the state Senate in May — will proceed through the committee process in the House, with a full vote possible as early as next week.

Time is an important factor for passing the expansion. Arizona’s state constitution requires a budget to be finalized by July 1st — an outcome that was in question as tensions flared over the Medicaid issue. Tobin said that he relented after realizing how much daylight there was between his alternative proposals and Brewer’s far more expansive plan.

“The counteroffers that we heard from [Brewer's] staff were so far away from where I was at, that it just became apparent that because you have to have Medicaid with the budget that the time was running out. I didn’t think there was enough room to negotiate a closer deal,” said Tobin in an interview with the Associated Press.

Brewer is far from the only Republican official to endorse expansion. But the combative governor’s tenacious — and often aggressive — pursuit of expanding Medicaid has taken many political observers by surprise.

While promoting Medicaid expansion in March, Brewer warned that the “human cost” of failing to expand the program “can’t be calculated.” At another rally, she sounded defiant in the face of Republican political blowback. “This is a fight worth fighting for. Are we going to win? Darn right, we are going to win,” she told a cheering crowd.

The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that expanding Medicaid would cut Arizona’s uninsurance by almost a third. That means that about 50,000 poor Arizonans would have access to basic and specialty health care, including diagnostic and clinical services, as well as care for the disabled and the mentally ill.

Brewer has followed up on her tough rhetoric with action. She recently vetoed five bills in quick succession to show her displeasure with the legislature’s inaction, following through on a threat she made to shut down lawmaking until Medicaid and the budget issue was resolved.

The arm-twisting appears to have worked, despite sharp criticism from conservatives in her own party. The chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee called Brewer a “rogue governor” in a letter warning Republican state senators not to buck the traditional party line on Medicaid. Tea Party activists have dismissed her actions as “tyranny.”

Although expansion is not quite a done deal yet, Republicans opposed to the measure admit that it’s likely to pass. “I don’t know if we have the numbers to stop it. But we are going to continue to fight,” said state Rep. Bob Thorpe (R).

Immigration

‘Show Me Your Papers’ Bill Could Make North Carolina The Next Arizona

(Credit: North Carolina Department of Transportation)

North Carolina is set to vote on a piece of anti-immigration legislation on par with Arizona and Alabama’s racially-tinged laws that drew national attention and ire from immigration advocates. The Reasonable Enactment of Comprehensive Legislation Addressing Immigration Matters (RECLAIM) in North Carolina Act, or HB 786 would expand the scope of law enforcement officials with “reasonable suspicion” to authorize immigration status checks on anyone who has been lawfully stopped.

As in Alabama and Arizona, North Carolina police officers would be able to stop immigrants for minor infractions like having broken head lights and then inquire about their legal status. If the measure passes, a matricula consular ID, which are used by Mexican nationals, would no longer be acceptable as a valid form of identification. Undocumented immigrants who drive would be required to obtain a vertical, status-identifying driver’s licenses, which requires them to admit their unlawful status. Immigrant applicants would also be required to submit fingerprints and to pass a criminal background check. As a result of a requirement in which immigrants must prove that they have lived in North Carolina for a year, seasonal workers would likely not qualify.

The measure also allows for law enforcement officials to have the ability to “securely transport an alien… to a federal facility” potentially without ever having seen a lawyer. It specifies, “a law enforcement agency shall obtain judicial or executive authorization from the Governor before securely transporting an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States to a point of transfer that is outside this State.”

The RECLAIM NC Act comes in the wake of a lawsuit against Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio in which his office has been accused of aggressively targeting and detaining Hispanic drivers. In numerous cases, Arpaio’s office was found to have stopped or harassed Hispanic drivers over minor speeding infractions when other drivers of a different national origin were let go. Along with Arizona, Iowa, Michigan, and Nebraska, North Carolina legislators had initially prohibited the issuance of driver’s licenses to immigrants who qualified under the Obama Administration’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which granted a two-year work authorization for individuals who had graduated from high school.

The hurdles posed by North Carolina’s law could severely undermine public safety benefits since immigrants would feel more inclined to stay in the shadows rather than to drive with a restricted driver’s licenses that bears the words, “no lawful status.” Aside from diverting state resources into prosecuting undocumented immigrants, NC also stands to lose money like Arizona did with SB-1070 from immigrant businesses and tourists who may be leery of law enforcement officials who can ask for their legal status. Although enforcing a “restricted” identification card has already been done in several other states, it only widens the divide of integrating immigrants into a society where they would be forced to carry the prominent fuchsia markings of their undocumented status.

Health

Appeals Court Strikes Down Arizona’s 20-Week Abortion Ban

On Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit permanently struck down Arizona’s “fetal pain” law that would have criminalized abortion services after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The panel of judges determined that the 20-week ban is unconstitutional under Roe v. Wade, which guarantees the right to legal abortion until the point of viability at about 24 weeks of pregnancy.

Representatives from the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Reproductive Rights, who filed the lawsuit against the 20-week ban, praised the judges’ decision. “We’re glad the court has reaffirmed that states cannot place unlawful burdens on a woman’s right to access safe reproductive health care,” Talcott Camp, the deputy director of ACLU’s Reproductive Freedom Project, said in a statement. Nancy Northrup, the president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, called the decision a “huge victory in the fight to protect women’s fundamental reproductive rights,” and noted that the Ninth Circuit’s decision should send a clear message to the other states that are attempting to limit abortion access before the point of viability.

Indeed, Arizona’s “fetal pain” measure — based on the scientifically-disputed notion that fetuses can feel pain after 20 weeks — is just one of several similar pieces of legislation to land in court. 20-week bans in Idaho and Georgia have also been blocked under the same constitutional logic. Arizona’s own law has actually been blocked since August, when the appeals court issued a temporary injunction right before the law was scheduled to take effect.

Imposing fetal pain measures is a popular anti-choice tactic to effectively chip away at Roe and narrow the window in which women may access legal abortion. Bans on late-term abortions are an especially big anti-choice priority right now, as abortion opponents attempt to capitalize on the high-profile case of illegal abortion provider Kermit Gosnell to misconstrue all later abortions as dangerous procedures. Just this week, Arizona Rep. Trent Franks (R), who has repeatedly attempted to impose a 20-week abortion ban on the District of Columbia, announced his intention to amend his legislation to push for a nationwide restriction.

When Arizona first passed its fetal pain law, it represented the most stringent abortion ban in the nation. Since the state defined gestation differently than other states, calculating from the moment of the woman’s missed period, the law could have potentially cut off legal abortion services at just 18 weeks of pregnancy. However, since Arizona first passed that piece of legislation last March, states have moved the goalposts even further. Arkansas banned abortions after 12 weeks, and North Dakota placed the cut-off at just six weeks of pregnancy.

Politics

Rewriting History: GOP Senator Pretends He Voted For Expanded Background Checks

On his Facebook page Friday, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) denied he ever voted against strengthened background checks amid blacklash over his opposition to the bipartisan Manchey-Toomey background checks amendment.

Flake used his vote for a watered-down amendment offered by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) to argue that he voted to expand background checks. In reality, the amendment would do little to expand background checks and in fact would weaken gun safety laws. Flake made the comments in response to an ad criticizing his opposition to Manchin-Toomey:

If you are anywhere close to a television set in Arizona in the coming days, you’ll likely see an ad about gun control financed by NYC Mayor Bloomberg.

Contrary to the ad, I did vote to strengthen background checks. I voted for the bipartisan Grassley Amendment, which included language from a bill I helped write which strengthened background checks for those with mental illness. The Grassley amendment also included language to increase prosecution of criminals and fugitives who circumvent the current background check system.

Mayor Bloomberg can spend millions trying to get me to support his view of background checks. That’s his call. But we Arizonans aren’t easily bullied. The legislation that would have done the most to keep guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them was the Grassley Amendment. And that’s the amendment I supported.

Flake has misrepresented his position on gun violence before. He once wrote to the mother of an Aurora shooting victim that “Strengthening background checks is something we agree on.” However, a month later, Flake voted against the Manchin-Toomey amendment to expand background checks.

What Flake voted for was a plan that would weaken gun laws by making it easier to buy and transport across state lines, helping people evade stricter laws. The central solution Flake cites from the Grassley plan — that states would share their mental health records and provides more prosecution of felons who seek guns — is only one step. It still does nothing to prevent people who take advantage of existing holes in the first place, like online sales. The Grassley amendment also would make it easier for some mentally ill people to obtain guns, by exempting patients who are involuntarily committed.

After his vote, Flake saw his approval rating tank. “Nothing like waking up to a poll saying you’re the nation’s least popular senator,” Flake wrote. “Given the public’s dim view of Congress in general, that probably puts me somewhere just below pond scum.” Flake’s colleague Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) is facing similar fire from constituents for her vote with the National Rifle Association.

Justice

Judge Suggests He Will Strike Down Arizona Discrimination Against Many Immigrant Drivers

After President Obama opened the door to temporary legal status for more than a million young immigrants who came to the United States as children, Arizona and other states imposed their own hurdles to these deferred action beneficiaries living and working in the United States as the policy intended. On Thursday, a federal judge suggested he would likely find unconstitutional an Arizona policy denying driver’s licenses to these Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals beneficiaries. In a ruling declining to temporarily block Gov. Jan Brewer’s policy pending trial, U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell — a George W. Bush appointee and former clerk to the late conservative Justice Williams Rehnquist — said there is likely no rational justification for Brewer flouting federal immigration policy and treating deferred action beneficiaries differently than all other temporary legal residents:

The Governor’s disagreement with the DACA program may be a rational political or policy view in the broad sense – reasonable people certainly can disagree on an issue as complex and difficult as immigration – but it provides no justification for saying that an Arizona driver’s license may be issued to one person who has been permitted to remain temporarily in the country on deferred action status – say for an individual humanitarian reason – while another person who has been permitted to remain temporarily in the country on deferred action status under the DACA program is denied a license. … The Governor’s political disagreement with the DACA program as “backdoor amnesty” does not change the fact that both individuals have been allowed by the federal government to live and work here, nor does it identify a reason that one of the individuals presents less of a driver’s-license-related risk to the State.

The DACA program was intended to give young undocumented immigrants access to legal employment while they remain in the country, but depriving these beneficiaries of driver’s licenses of and other basic government services imposes major obstacles to achieving that goal. This hostility toward federal immigration policy should come as no surprise from the state that brought us SB 1070 and other discriminatory immigration laws, many parts of which have already been struck down by courts.

In opting not to block Brewer’s policy pending trial, Judge Campbell reasoned that the plaintiffs were not suffering irreparable harm, because most of them either continued to drive without a license out of necessity, or had other means of transportation. But this does not mitigate the risk that these immigrants incur every day they drive without a license, nor the public safety risks and hundreds of millions of dollars in insurance claims costs imposed by uninsured drivers. These factors will likely be a consideration in a final ruling by Campbell, and he appears poised to find Arizona’s policy a violation of the Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause. Campbell also rejected the state’s motion to dismiss the case.

LGBT

POLL: Majority Of Arizonans Support Marriage Equality

A new Rocky Mountain Poll released today shows that a majority of Arizona voters support marriage equality — and by a significant margin. According to the survey, 55 percent support the freedom to marry and only 35 percent opposed it. Even among voters over the age of 54, a 46 percent plurality favor the change while 40 percent oppose it. As in other polls, certain groups favored it at higher rates, including Latinos (75 percent), Democrats (70 percent), those under the age of 35 (67 percent), Moderates/Independents (64 percent), and women (60 percent).

Last November, 22-year-old activist Tanner Pritts announced an effort to repeal Arizona’s constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, but it doesn’t seem to have taken off. Recently, the town of Bisbee established civil unions for same-sex couples, and the city of Tempe may attempt to do the same.

Immigration

Migrant Death Tracker App May Have Unintended Consequence

(Credit: Mother Jones)

Since 2001, over 2,100 migrants have died trying to cross through the Sonoran Desert in southern Arizona. On Monday, the Pima County medical examiner’s office and the human rights group Humane Borders jointly unveiled “The Arizona OpenGIS Initiative for Deceased Migrants,” which is a virtual system that would allow the geographic tracking of desert migrant deaths. The application serves to help family members know the grim circumstance surrounding missing border-crossing relatives. Once deceased relatives are located and identified, family members can collect the remains.

Because migration patterns change for human “coyotes” who bring migrants into the United States, this application has far-reaching consequences. Updated quarterly every year, the system will guide humanitarian organizations to know where to leave aid packages such as water at established routes.

But at the same time, this tracking system may be used by anti-immigrant citizen vigilantes like the Minutemen seeking to secure weak border points. Mother Jones’ Tim Murphy points out that migrant deaths have doubled since 2011 since more border enforcement resources have forced migrants to rely on smugglers. Preying on desperate migrants, smugglers have seized the opportunity to offer a way around secure border points by using boats and trucks, many times with disastrous results. Unfortunately, this grim measure of border security based on border deaths may simultaneously create more secure borders, but at the cost of having more border deaths.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up