Jan Brewer’s Unseemly Glee

The US District Court for Arizona handed down an order of partial summary judgement in the big Prop200 election rights case, Gonzales v. Arizona, and Secretary of State Jan Brewer reacted as if she had just parted the Red Sea. Her press release crowed:

“I am extremely happy to have earned this sweeping court victory on behalf of the citizens of Arizona, yet again Arizonan’s are able to retain their inherent right to properly establish proof of citizenship when registering to vote and require proper identification when voting at the polling place.”

Beyond the distasteful crowing over a law that is more about disenfranchising Americans than about fighting non-existent voter identity fraud, the idea that Brewer did anything to "earn" this victory is specious, AG Goddard’s office is the one doing the litigation, and you don’t see him crowing about his great victory; he didn’t even make a press release. That says something telling about Brewer’s political intent: she is playing to her base using this litigation. For her, it’s not about upholding the law, it’s about positioning herself with her party’s xenophobes for a run at the Governorship. She should be concerned with Arizonan’s inherent right to vote, and instead she waxes rhapsodic about some inherent right to demand ID at the polls. Since Prop. 200 became law, 30,000 legal citizens have not been allowed
to register to vote, and countless residents have been refused at the
polls.

Missing from Brewer’s triumphal release is the simple fact that this decision was just clearing the deadwood issues from the case. When there are multiple consolidated plaintiffs in a case, each with their own lawyers, you get a nice flurry of theories of the case. What the court did in this summary judgment is toss out those claims that were either weak to begin with, or had been mooted by other court decisions subsequent to the complaints. The court’s decision simply sharpened the focus of the court on those complaints that are viable and require litigation.

Nowhere in Brewer’s release note that two vital issues remain for trial: whether Prop200 is a disparate burden on minorities under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, and whether it is an undue burden on the right to vote under 14th Amendment jurisprudence. These critical and unresolved issues were not addressed and are the heart of the case as it now moves forward, not to mention being vital civil rights issues for Arizona’s voters. You would think that Brewer might be interested in the civil rights of Arizona’s voters, but then you would simply demonstrate that you don’t know Jan Brewer.

What Brewer did make sure to point out is that court "sided with Brewer on the following areas:

• the National Voter Registration Act does not prohibit requiring voters
      to prove citizenship when registering to vote
• Prop. 200 is not an unconstitutional poll tax
• Prop. 200 identification requirements do not create two classes of voters
• Proof of citizenship is material in determining an individual’s eligibility to vote
• The Secretary of State’s submission of pre-clearance from the U.S. Department of Justice on Proposition 200 was in proper form
• The Secretary of State makes available the federal voter registration form as required by law
• Requiring proof of citizenship does not conflict with other Arizona laws
• The Secretary of State has met her statutory obligations required in performing the duties of her job"

Now, reading the court’s opinion, I concur on every one of those points… except the last. Nowhere does the court indicate that Jan Brewer is meeting all statutory obligations of her job. They do agree that Brewer was making registration forms available to a degree legally acceptable, but to claim a mandate for your entire administration on the basis of someone agreeing that you aren’t breaking the law in one area seems to me to be overreaching. And a little needy? Someone needs a hug and some ‘me’ time, I think.

I don’t have an objection to the litigation of these issues. These are important legal questions and they need to be resolved. I don’t fault Goddard for his office’s involvement in defending Prop200, and I wouldn’t fault the Secretary of State (though these days I guess she styling herself Acting Governor and declaring emergencies…) for defending a law made by initiative, even if I disagreed with it (as I do this law). But Brewer seems determined to approach the issue as a political hack, not a state official. She consistently interprets the law against the civil rights of Arizona’s citizens, hoards power, uses her position to play to her base, and generally tries desperately to act like another Secretary of State we all love to loathe.