Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/12pdf/12-71_7l48.pdf
Page Number: 6

Cite as:  570 U. S. ____ (2013) 

3 

Opinion of the Court 

2004,  Arizona  voters  adopted  Proposition  200,  a  ballot 
initiative  designed  in  part  “to  combat  voter  fraud  by  re-
quiring  voters  to  present  proof  of  citizenship  when  they
register  to  vote  and  to  present  identification  when  they
vote  on  election  day.”    Purcell  v.  Gonzalez,  549  U. S.  1,  2 
(2006) (per curiam).2  Proposition 200 amended the State’s
election  code  to  require  county  recorders  to  “reject  any
application  for  registration  that  is  not  accompanied  by 
satisfactory  evidence  of  United  States  citizenship.”    Ariz. 
Rev. Stat. Ann. §16–166(F) (West Supp. 2012).  The proof-
of-citizenship requirement is satisfied by (1) a photocopy of 
the  applicant’s  passport  or  birth  certificate,  (2)  a  driver’s 
license  number,  if  the  license  states  that  the  issuing  au-
thority verified the holder’s U. S.  citizenship, (3) evidence
of  naturalization,  (4)  tribal  identification,  or  (5)  “[o]ther
documents or methods of proof . . . established pursuant to
the  Immigration  Reform  and  Control  Act  of  1986.”    Ibid. 
The  EAC  did  not  grant  Arizona’s  request  to  include  this
new  requirement  among  the  state-specific  instructions
for  Arizona  on  the  Federal  Form.    App.  225.  Conse-
quently, the Federal Form includes a statutorily required
attestation,  subscribed  to  under  penalty  of  perjury,  that 
an  Arizona  applicant  meets  the  State’s  voting  require-
ments 
the  citizenship  requirement),  see 
§1973gg–7(b)(2), but does not require concrete evidence of 
citizenship.

(including 

The  two  groups  of  plaintiffs  represented  here—a  group 
of  individual  Arizona  residents  (dubbed  the  Gonzalez
plaintiffs, after lead plaintiff Jesus Gonzalez) and a group 
of  nonprofit  organizations  led  by  the  Inter  Tribal  Council 
of  Arizona  (ITCA)—filed  separate  suits  seeking  to  enjoin
the  voting  provisions  of  Proposition  200.  The  District 

—————— 

2 In May 2005, the United States Attorney General precleared under
§5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 the procedures Arizona adopted to
implement Proposition 200.  Purcell, 549 U. S., at 3.