## Facts

- Arizona amended Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 16-152(A)(5) in 2011 to require the state voter registration form to list the two largest political parties and include a blank line for “other party preference options.”
- Before the amendment, the form included only a blank space for party preference without any preprinted party names.
- At the relevant time, Arizona’s two largest parties by registration were the Republican and Democratic Parties; the Libertarian Party’s registration was under 1%.
- Two minor political parties (Arizona Libertarian Party and Arizona Green Party) and three registered voters sued the Arizona Secretary of State under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
- Plaintiffs alleged the form’s design favored the two major parties and discouraged voters from affiliating with minor parties, violating the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the state, and plaintiffs appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether listing only the two largest parties on the voter registration form, while providing a blank line for others, burdens minor parties’ and voters’ First Amendment associational rights and Fourteenth Amendment equal protection rights.
2. What level of scrutiny applies to this election regulation under the governing framework for election-law challenges.
3. Whether the state’s asserted administrative interests justify the form’s design.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the state.
- The court held plaintiffs failed to produce evidence that the form actually discouraged or prevented registration with minor parties.
- The court found any burden on plaintiffs’ constitutional rights was, at most, de minimis.
- Given the minimal burden, the court applied deferential review and upheld the statute as rationally related to legitimate state interests.
- A concurring judge agreed with the result but questioned the Ninth Circuit’s burden-shifting approach, concluding the statute would be valid under the Supreme Court’s balancing framework as well.

## Legal Principles

- Election regulations triggering only minimal burdens on associational and voting-related rights generally receive highly deferential review rather than strict scrutiny.
- Plaintiffs challenging election-administration rules must support claims of meaningful burdens with evidence; speculative or unsupported deterrence assertions are insufficient.
- Administrative interests such as efficient processing, accurate recording of party preference, cost control, and reducing clerical error are legitimate state interests.
- A registration form that preprints major-party options but preserves a meaningful method to select other parties (e.g., a write-in line) can be upheld when it does not bar or materially impede minor-party affiliation.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit held that Arizona’s voter registration form could list only the two largest parties while providing a blank line for other party preferences because the record showed no more than a minimal burden on minor parties and voters, and the design was rationally related to legitimate administrative objectives.


Ariz. Libertarian Party v. Reagan, 798 F.3d 723 (9th Cir. 2015)