Campaign Legal Center and co-counsel filed a lawsuit on behalf of several national and Arizona-based organizations alleging that two of Arizona’s new anti-voter laws impose severe, arbitrary and discriminatory burdens on Arizona voters that undermine their freedom to vote and violate federal law.
Back to topArizona is attempting to ignore federal law to silence the voices of its voters.
Since 2004 the state has been trying to make it harder for Americans to register to vote and access the ballot box.
Arizona was the first state to enact a law that requires voters to provide burdensome citizenship documentation to register to vote, and Campaign Legal...
Campaign Legal Center (CLC) and co-counsel filed a lawsuit on behalf of Living United for Change in Arizona (LUCHA), the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), Arizona Students’ Association (ASA), and Arizona Democracy Resource Center (ADRC) challenging Arizona’s H.B. 2492, which was signed into law on March 30, 2022. Our case has been consolidated with several other lawsuits challenging the same Arizona statutes and will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on December 8, 2026 under the caption Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota.
Our lawsuit alleges that H.B. 2492 denies eligible Arizona voters the right to vote based solely on which type of voter registration form they use to register to vote and whether they have or can obtain paperwork that proves their current residence and U.S. citizenship status. Voters are already required to attest to these facts – under penalty of perjury – to register to vote, and federal law prohibits states from imposing additional requirements to register to vote in federal elections.
H.B. 2492 would also return Arizona to its arbitrary dual-registration system, where a voter’s right to vote in federal elections is contingent on which form the voter uses to register. In 2018, Campaign Legal Center filed a lawsuit against Arizona over its “dual registration system,” alleging that election officials in Arizona were determining whether to register voters for federal elections based solely on whether the voter submitted a state-issued registration form or a federal registration form. As a result of the lawsuit, a federal court in Arizona issued a consent decree that requires Arizona election officials to register voters for federal elections regardless of which form they used and compare a voter’s registration application against the state driver’s license database to determine whether the state already has proof of a voter’s U.S. citizenship before blocking a voter from registering for state elections.
The new law also attempted to prohibit voters who do not produce specific documents from using vote-by-mail or early voting and prevent them from voting in presidential elections at all — but thanks to an order from a federal district court judge in Arizona, those provisions are no longer in effect.
At the U.S. Supreme Court, we will defend the consent decree requiring Arizona to treat voters the same regardless of what form they use to register to vote. We will also be defending a key provision of the NVRA that prohibits states from conducting systematic voter list maintenance programs during the final 90 days before a federal election.
This 90-day “quiet period” is a key safeguard for voters that ensures that states do not erroneously cancel their voter registrations too close to Election Day, preventing them from exercising their freedom to vote in the upcoming election. In this case, the Court will consider whether systematic programs to remove registered voters from the rolls on the basis of alleged non-U.S. citizenship fall within that 90-day quiet period and are therefore barred by the NVRA.
Federal law creates safeguards that prohibit states from creating unnecessary barriers that restrict eligible voters’ freedom to vote. Voters should be able to cast their ballots freely, safely and equally to make the promise of democracy real for all Arizonans.
