The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments for early December in a case that will determine whether Arizona can require proof of citizenship to register to vote and if it can purge voter rolls before an election. The case, originating from 2022, was brought forward by Mi Familia Vota and Living United for Change in Arizona, challenging two state laws that could affect how residents vote. The outcome of this case has the potential to influence similar laws in other states.
The challenged laws, signed by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, aim to prohibit new voters who do not provide proof of citizenship and prevent those already registered as federal-only voters from casting ballots by mail or in presidential elections. Furthermore, these laws mandate extensive checks of voter rolls for noncitizens and facilitate the removal of voters. The Republican-controlled Arizona legislature enacted these bills in response to what the source material describes as "false claims of widespread noncitizen voting" in the 2020 election, claims that former President Donald Trump and his allies have made without substantiation.
The high court agreed to hear the case after national Republicans and the U.S. Department of Justice petitioned for review. This followed a 2025 ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which concurred with a lower court's decision that the Arizona laws violate the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and the Civil Rights Act, and contradict Supreme Court precedent. The lower court had initially blocked portions of the laws from being implemented, a decision upheld by the Court of Appeals.
Evidence suggests that noncitizen voting is exceptionally rare, accounting for approximately 0.0001% of all votes cast. An analysis by the Bipartisan Policy Center, utilizing data from the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank, "found only 77 instances of noncitizens voting between 1999 and 2023" and concluded that such voting has not been significant enough to impact an election's outcome. Despite this, allegations of noncitizen voting have been central to Trump's agenda, leading his Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security to aggressively seek out such cases, often relying on a flawed federal database known as Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) that has been found to incorrectly flag U.S. citizens.
Arizona has mandated proof of citizenship for state and local elections since 2004. However, a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court ruling stated that the state could not impose this requirement for federal elections, which are regulated by the National Voting Rights Act. Individuals unable to provide proof of citizenship can register in Arizona as federal-only voters, allowing them to participate in federal races by attesting to U.S. citizenship under penalty of perjury. The 2022 laws banned new federal-only voter registrations and restricted those already on the federal-only list from voting by mail or in presidential contests. These laws also permit voter rolls to be purged of noncitizens within 90 days before an election, a practice not allowed under the National Voting Rights Act.
The scheduling of oral arguments coincides with a recent legal dispute involving Arizona’s secretary of state and attorney general against Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap, concerning alleged noncitizens on voter rolls. Heap utilized the SAVE database, which had been updated by the Trump administration to identify non-citizens registered to vote, and flagged 207 voters he deemed likely noncitizens. He then forwarded this information to the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. Of these 207 flagged voters, 60 had cast ballots, leading Heap to reclassify them to the “non eligible” category. This designation means that these voters would be unable to participate in future elections unless they provide documented proof of citizenship.
However, reviews of these 60 voters by both the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and the Attorney General’s Office found that only eight were actually noncitizens, with no more than three having voted in the same election. Despite their citizenship being verified by both offices, 25 of these 60 voters had their registration canceled and are now unable to vote in this year’s election, according to the lawsuit.