League of Women Voters of the United States v. Newby (also League of Women Voters of the United States v. Harrington)

In Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona in 2013, the Supreme Court struck down an Arizona law requiring documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote, in violation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). The Supreme Court ruled that, under the NVRA, Arizona could not add a proof-of-citizenship requirement to federal voter registration forms without Elections Assistance Commission (EAC) approval.

The NVRA requires states to simplify the federal voter registration process by providing opportunities to register by mail, in person, and while applying for a driver’s license. For mail-in registration, states must use a standard federal voter registration form created by the EAC. While states are free to create their own forms with additional requirements for state elections, they do not have the authority to change the federal form — that authority is left to the EAC. The federal form is meant to guarantee that, no matter what procedural obstacles states create in their own registration forms, all voters have a simple way to register to vote in federal elections.

On January 29, 2016, EAC Executive Director Brian Newby sent letters to the secretaries of state of Alabama, Georgia, and Kansas stating he would allow the three states to add a proof-of-citizenship requirement to the federal voter registration form. In response, the League of Women Voters of the United States (LWVUS), LWV of Alabama, LWV of Georgia, and LWV of Kansas filed a federal lawsuit on February 12, 2016, challenging Director Newby’s decision to allow the states’ proof-of-citizenship requirement. 

The plaintiffs argued Director Newby violated the NVRA, as well as the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs the way federal agencies make and issue different regulations. The NVRA states the federal registration form can only require identifying information necessary to enable state election officials to assess the eligibility of applicants and administer the voter registration process. But, when approving the proof-of-citizenship requirement, Director Newby did not establish the requirement was necessary for the three states to assess voter eligibility and administer the voter registration process — violating both the NVRA and the APA.

On February 17, 2016, the plaintiffs filed for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction to stop the EAC from enforcing Director Newby’s decision. The plaintiffs asserted they would experience irreparable harm from Director Newby’s decision because citizenship documentation requirements make it more difficult to register to vote, which undermines the efforts of civic engagement organizations like LWV, whose primary mission is to register voters and encourage voter participation.

The court denied the temporary restraining order on February 23, 2016, ruling the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate they would suffer irreparable harm from the proof-of-citizenship requirement, given the voter registration deadlines for the states’ primary elections had already passed by the time the motion was filed. The court also stated it was not yet convinced the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the case's merits.

On June 26, 2016, the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction, ruling the plaintiffs did not demonstrate irreparable harm because the proof-of-citizenship requirement (1) did not preclude the plaintiffs from registering voters, and (2) was not being enforced in Alabama and Georgia. 

The plaintiffs appealed to the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. On September 9, 2016, the DC court overturned the district court’s decision and blocked the proof-of-citizenship requirement through a preliminary injunction. First, the DC Circuit found the proof-of-citizenship requirement harmed the plaintiffs by “unquestionably making it more difficult for the Leagues to accomplish their primary mission of registering voters.” Second, the harm was irreparable because “there can be no do over and no redress” once the November election registration deadlines pass. Third, the requirement would place administrative burdens on the three states and would confuse voters. And finally, the court highlighted the relevance of the Supreme Court’s decision in 2013 to strike down Arizona’s similar documentary proof of citizenship requirement.

On February 24, 2017, the district court remanded the case to the EAC, instructing the Commission to determine whether Director Newby exceeded his authority by permitting the proof-of-citizenship requirement. In June 2017, the EAC announced it was split among party lines and could not come to a decision. 

Because the EAC failed to decide whether Director Newby exceeded his authority, the preliminary injunction stayed in place. The courts took no further action for four years. 

In September 2021, the district court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and permanently blocked the proof-of-citizenship requirement, ruling Director Newby violated the NVRA and APA. 

LWVUS, LWV of Alabama, LWV of Kansas, and LWV of Georgia were represented by Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP, Brennan Center for Justice, and Kirkland & Ellis LLP.