11 For African Americans in the South in the early- to mid-1900s, literacy tests, poll taxes, intimidation, and death threats made participating in the democratic process nearly impossible. In 1940, 70 years after the 15th Amendment granted all races the right to vote, only 3% of southern black men and women of voting age were registered and able to vote. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 helped turn the tide by invalidating state and local registration laws and practices that prevented black citizens from voting.To further increase participation, Congress passed the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which requires state motor vehicle agencies to offer voter registration to individuals applying for driver’s licenses. Applicants aren’t required to provide evidence of citizenship, but must swear, under penalty of perjury, that they are US citizens. Proposition 200, an Arizona law passed by ballot initiative, threatened to undermine voter registration reforms by requiring proof of citizenship. After the law resulted in the rejection of close to 30,000 registration applications—a large percentage of them submitted by Latino and African Americans—several Arizona residents and a nonprofit organization sued the state. When the US Supreme Court agreed to consider Arizona v. Intertribal Council of Arizona on appeal, Elise Boddie, then director of litigation for the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, contacted attorney Jerry Gotkin to see if Mintz Levin would co-author an amicus brief outlining why the NVRA had been enacted and why Proposition 200 undermined its aims. Jerry and Mintz Levin attorney Mike Arnold were pleased to have the opportunity to influence the case’s outcome. “We knew it could have an enormous effect on future federal elections, and therefore on the direction of the country,”Mike says. “We were also proud to work again with the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, for whom we had previously—and successfully—worked on an amicus brief in aid of assuring an African-American woman of her right to become the Chief Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court,”Jerry adds. The team researched the congressional record, legislative history, and Proposition 200. They also looked at the impact of registration laws on minority voters and on curbing voter fraud.The NAACP incorporated Mintz Levin’s research into its brief, which Jerry and Mike edited. In June 2013, in a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court invalidated Proposition 200’s proof of citizenship requirement because it conflicts with the requirements of the National Voters Rights Act. Writing for the majority, however, Justice Scalia noted that while the constitution gives Congress the power to ensure that eligible individuals can vote, it also gives states the power to say who can vote. He also provided a potential roadmap to implement a proof of citizenship requirement through alternative legislative and administrative maneuvers. Although Arizona may eventually use that roadmap, the firm’s brief reminded the judges that their decisions have real consequences, “in this case, for people who have historically been disenfranchised for dubious reasons,”Mike says. “We greatly appreciate the opportunity to work with Mintz Levin on this important amicus brief, which describes the manner in which Congress enacted the NVRA to usher in a period of electoral expansion. Our brief successfully argued to the Supreme Court that, absent full enforcement of the NVRA, measures such as Arizona’s Proposition 200 would undermine the hard-fought progress that has been made in combating discrimination in our political process.” Ryan Haygood Director NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund Political Participation Group Democracy in Balance