Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

6 Bumps

Should states be allowed to require proof of citizenship to vote?

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned Arizona’s requirement that people show proof of citizenship to register to vote.

The split decision by a three-judge panel determined that the requirement to show proof of citizenship — passed by voters in 2004 — is not consistent with the National Voter Registration Act.

Associate Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, temporarily sitting by designation, and Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta, with chief judge Alex Kozinski dissenting, said Prop. 200 creates an additional hurdle, while the national act is intended to reduce “state-imposed obstacles” to registration.

Answer Question

Asked by grlygrlz2 at 3:56 PM on Oct. 27, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (106,530 Credits)
Answers (41)
  • Absolutely!

    Answer by cheekycherub at 3:57 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • YES why the hell not?

    Answer by tnmomofive at 3:57 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • Yes

    Answer by LuvBug3 at 3:58 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • YES

    Answer by thelowlander at 3:59 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • Of course! You have to be a citizen to vote in the first place, so why not require proof? I believe you have to show your driver's license when you go to the polls. Can you even get a driver's license if you're not a citizen?

    Answer by thatgirl70 at 3:59 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • Yes!... A person with no citizenship may leave the country tomorrow!

    Answer by Monica655 at 3:59 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • Yes, they should have to show proof of citizenship.

    Answer by Dyndudes at 3:59 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • So~If the National Voter Registration Act. applies perjury penalties to applicants who lie about their eligibility. How does a state check to see if they lied? Where is the states right to enforce Accountability?



    Comment by grlygrlz2 (original poster) at 4:00 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • And this is why the 9th circuit court of appeals is a joke (always has been, always will be). That's the court you take things to when you want your decision to be decisively overturned by the SCOTUS because it's pretty much guaranteed. And it shouldn't just require proof of US citizenship, it should be up to date, valid proof, that the person lives in the actual district they're voting in more than 6 months of the year.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 4:01 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

  • OFCOURSE they should have to show proof! If they are not legally here, then they should not be allowed to vote. Thats just like.. common sense... isnt it?

    Answer by xxMasonsMommaxx at 4:02 PM on Oct. 27, 2010

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.