HR-6102-119
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Sponsored by Gary Palmer (R-AL)
What it does
This bill would amend the National Voter Registration Act so that a state may, but is not required to, require applicants to provide proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, and the federal mail registration form may include that requirement. It would also correct an outdated reference by replacing "Federal Election Commission" with "Election Assistance Commission." The changes would take effect on enactment.
Who benefits
States that want documentary citizenship checks and have been limited by the current federal mail form, which relies on an applicant's sworn attestation. Voters and officials who want added assurance that only citizens are registered. Election administrators in states that choose to adopt the requirement and gain a clear statutory basis after litigation over earlier state proof-of-citizenship laws.
Who is hurt
Eligible citizens who lack ready access to documents such as a passport or birth certificate, including some elderly voters, low-income voters, rural residents, and married women whose names differ from their records. Voter registration groups that run mail and community drives, which may face more rejected or incomplete forms. State and local election offices that adopt the requirement and may bear costs to verify documents and handle pending applications. Voters in states that opt in could face different registration rules than voters in other states.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that only citizens may vote in federal elections, and that a sworn statement alone cannot be checked when a state wants documentary verification. They contend the bill is permissive, leaving each state to decide, and that it resolves the conflict the Supreme Court identified in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council (2013), where the Court said Congress's current law barred Arizona from requiring proof on the federal form.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that noncitizen registration is already rare and already punishable by federal penalties, while documentary requirements can block eligible citizens who lack easy access to papers. They contend the bill would create a patchwork of state registration rules and added administrative costs, and that it would reverse the National Voter Registration Act's goal of making registration simpler, as Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council (2013) recognized.
Constitutional context
Congress may regulate the "times, places and manner" of federal elections under the Elections Clause (Art. I, §4), while states set voter qualifications under Art. I, §2 and the Seventeenth Amendment. Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona (2013) held the current National Voter Registration Act preempts a state proof-of-citizenship requirement on the federal form, and noted a state could seek to show that the federal form is insufficient to enforce its citizenship qualification. This bill would change the statute that case interpreted.
Checks and balances
Congress would expand state discretion over federal registration procedures, with the Election Assistance Commission and state election officials implementing it, and courts would remain a check through challenges under the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution.
Historical precedent
Arizona's Proposition 200 (2004) required proof of citizenship for registration and was held preempted as applied to the federal form in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council (2013), and similar proposals such as the SAVE Act have been introduced in Congress.