• Arizona’s 15 counties are collaborating with DHS to remove nearly 50,000 “federal-only” voter registrants who lack proof of U.S. citizenship (DPOC) for state/local elections, following a lawsuit by conservative group America First Legal.
• A 2024 settlement requires counties — including Maricopa — to verify citizenship via DHS databases, enforcing Arizona’s 2004 DPOC law. Critics argue this is voter suppression, while supporters call it necessary for election integrity.
• The move follows Arizona’s history of voter fraud claims (largely unsubstantiated) and Republican-led election reforms, spurred by controversies like the 2020 election and Kari Lake’s 2022 gubernatorial loss.
• Democrats and civil rights groups warn the purge could disenfranchise eligible voters, particularly lower-income and rural residents, due to logistical barriers in obtaining DPOC.
• The purge coincides with GOP-backed federal efforts like the SAFE Act (requiring citizenship proof for voting), though broader adoption faces Senate hurdles. The outcome may influence the 2024 election landscape.

In a move reigniting national debates over voter eligibility and election integrity, Arizona’s 15 counties have begun collaborating with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls following a lawsuit by conservative advocacy group America First Legal (AFL). The initiative, which targets nearly 50,000 “federal-only” registrants who failed to provide documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) for state and local elections, answers longstanding Republican calls for stricter enforcement of voting laws. The dispute centers on Arizona’s 2004 legal requirement mandating DPOC since upheld by the Supreme Court, and its monthly requirement for county recorders to verify voter eligibility. The process, finalized after a federal case led to a stipulation of dismissal in April, has divided political lines, with supporters lauding it as a necessary safeguard and critics calling it an unnecessary and suppressive overreach.

Settlement prompts compliance with Arizona’s citizenship requirements

The purge stems from a lawsuit filed in August 2024 by AFL—founded by former Trump aids—including naturalized citizen Yvonne Cahill and nonprofit EZAZ.org, against counties for failing to enforce state laws requiring citizenship verification. “The counties had not been following the law,” AFL Senior Counsel James Rogers told Fox News, citing Arizona’s mandate for monthly reviews of voter rolls to identify noncitizens. Under the settlement, counties, including Maricopa (the state’s most populous), must now request DHS verification of citizenship for the 50,000 U.S. citizens eligible only to vote in federal elections.

According to Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap, the effort aims to “clean up our voter rolls” and “restore trust in Maricopa County elections.” He emphasized that citizenship verification is essential to upholding “one citizen, one vote,” aligning with Arizona’s legal obligations. The process marks Arizona’s first comprehensive use of federal databases like DHS since a 2013 Supreme Court ruling (Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council) curtailed state voter registration requirements. That decision held that while federal law requires voters only to attest to citizenship via a checkbox, states could impose additional proof requirements for in-state elections — a balance Arizona’s law preserved.

Legal battle and historical context: Arizona’s history of voter fraud claims

The case unfolds amid Arizona’s contentious political history surrounding immigration and voter fraud. In 2020, counties like Maricopa came under scrutiny after claims emerged — unsubstantiated by evidence — of widespread irregularities in mail-in voting following President Joe Biden’s narrow win. Former President Donald Trump’s November 2024 victory in the state, paired with Kari Lake’s failed 2022 gubernatorial bid, amplified calls for election reforms. “It’s a pyrrhic victory knowing Arizona had to be sued to take [noncitizens] off the rolls,” Lake said, while urging accountability for officials who delayed compliance.

State Rep. Jake Hoffman, a sponsor of election integrity legislation, excoriated Democratic claims that the reforms are “deceitful,” arguing that opposing stricter ID laws risks repeating historical party failures like Green Party flaws in the early 20th century. Critics note the dearth of documented voter fraud cases: the National Priorities Project found only 422 credible fraud instances since 2000, less than 0.0001% of votes cast. Yet, conservative groups argue that even small numbers of ineligible voters undermine public trust.

Opposition concerns: Barriers to voting and civil rights pushback

The settlement faces backlash from Democrats and voting rights advocates, who warn that aggressive purges efforts disproportionately hinder eligible voters. “The SAVE Act and state-level measures make voting harder for lower-income folks and rural residents,” stressed Northeastern University’s Costas Panagopoulos, citing higher costs and logistical hurdles for citizens lacking immediate access to birth certificates or passports. Brookings Institution’s Darrell West added that rural voters may struggle with DPOC requirements, potentially depressing turnout.

Critics also note that Arizona’s DPOC policy already excludes noncitizens lawfully authorized to vote only in federal elections — approximately 500 U.S. jurisdictions permit noncitizen local voting. Meanwhile, AFL’s suit emphasized that counties ignored existing state permits to cooperate with DHS for citizenship checks. “Counties like Coconino skipped steps Congress specifically authorized,” Rogers said, referencing 8 U.S.C. §1644, which allows federal-state data sharing for election integrity.

Next steps: The SAVE Act and the 2024 election landscape

As Arizona grapples with implementation, conservative voter reform efforts gain momentum nationwide. The Republican-backed S. 925/H.R. 2674, the “Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act,” recently passed the U.S. House, requiring federal voters nationwide to confirm citizenship via state databases or documents like passports. Yet its prospects in the Senate remain dim absent centrist GOP defectors. Meanwhile, Arizona’s new registration changes and electoral board dominated by conservative voters have drawn scrutiny from national Democrats.

In Arizona, the purge could reshape September’s special election for a congressional seat, where nearly 100 days remain before the voting deadline. Civil rights groups vow to monitor the process, alleging indiscriminate removal of eligible citizens. “This isn’t about fraud — it’s about making already marginalized communities scared to participate,” said an uncredited defense source.

Conclusion

Arizona’s voter roll purge underscores the clash between election integrity and voting access at the heart of American democracy. Conservative advocates frame the process as a protective measure against diluting electoral voice, while opponents see it as an exclusionary tactic. As the state’s 50,000 “federal-only” registrants await verification, the outcome will test not just legal mandates but the nation’s capacity to balance competing visions of equity and security in the electoral process.

Sources include:

100percentfedup.com

FoxNews.com

Newsweek.com