Making Sense of the Arizona Supreme Court's Ruling on Citizenship Verification

In a landmark decision, the Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that nearly 98,000 people whose citizenship documents hadn't been confirmed can participate in state and local elections. This significant ruling comes after a database error was discovered, which had mistakenly designated these voters as having access to the full ballot since the 1990s. The court's decision has far-reaching implications, especially in hotly contested races for the state Legislature. The story begins with a disagreement between Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer on the status of these voters. Richer argued that Fontes was ignoring state law by advising county officials to allow these voters to cast full ballots. Fontes countered that not allowing them to vote would raise equal protection and due process concerns. The Arizona Supreme Court, which leans Republican, sided with Fontes. The justices ruled that county officials lacked the authority to change the voters' statuses because they had registered long ago and attested under the penalty of law that they were citizens. The court also noted that the voters were not at fault for the database error and that there was little time left before the November 5 general election.The nearly 98,000 affected voters, mostly residing in Maricopa County, are longtime state residents ranging in age from 45 to 60. About 37% are registered Republicans, 27% are registered Democrats, and the rest are independents or affiliated with minor parties. Arizona is unique in requiring voters to prove their citizenship to participate in local and state races. The database error, which was discovered earlier this year, was caused by a system coding issue. It mistakenly marked voters who obtained drivers' licenses before 1996 as full-ballot voters, making them eligible to participate in state and local elections. The error has since been resolved, but the ruling has significant implications for these voters and the elections. The decision is seen as a significant victory for these voters, who were at risk of being disenfranchised. Election officials will be contacting voters who need to update their proof of citizenship after the election. One voter, John Groseclose, expressed relief at the ruling, saying he was glad he wouldn't have to spend more time resolving the issue.