Harrison v. Laveen

Harrison v. Laveen
Harrison v. Laveen
Court	Arizona Supreme Court
Decided	July 15, 1948
Citation(s)	67 Ariz. 337, 196 P.2d 456
Case opinions
Decision by	Levi Stewart Udall
Concurrence	Rawghlie Clement Stanford ; Arthur T. LaPrade ;
Dissent	none

Last updated August 17, 2023

Harrison v. Laveen, 67 Ariz. 337, 196 P.2d 456 (1948), also referred to Harrison et al. v. Laveen and Harrison and Austin v. Laveen, was a court case decided before the Arizona Supreme Court, the highest state court of the U.S. state of Arizona, in 1948. The plaintiffs were members of the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation who were prevented from registering to vote. The court decision overturned an earlier decision by the court that American Indians were ineligible to vote, resulting in the suffrage of native peoples in Arizona. Other voting obstacles such as literacy tests and language barriers continued to exist, preventing a majority of American Indians in Arizona from voting.

Background

The Arizona Supreme Court had ruled shortly after the passage of the Indian Citizenship Act in 1924 that American Indians were ineligible to vote. The 1928 ruling in Porter v. Hall stated that natives were "persons under guardianship";^[1] section 2, article 7 of the Constitution of Arizona said that such persons were ineligible to vote.^[2] A 1947 report by the US government noted that: "In past years, American Indians have also been denied the right to vote and other political rights in a number of states. Most of these restrictions have been abandoned, but in two states, New Mexico and Arizona, Indians continue to be disenfranchised."^[3]

Frank Harrison was a World War II veteran who lived in the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation in Arizona, and Harry Austin was the chairman of the tribe. In 1947, Harrison and Austin went to the registrar's office in Maricopa County to attempt to register to vote. They were denied registration by the county recorder Roger G. Laveen, who cited the earlier decision that said American Indians were "persons under guardianship" and ineligible to vote in elections.^[2]

Court decisions

Austin and Harrison filed suit against Laveen in the Maricopa County superior court.^[4] Laveen filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which was granted by the court.^[3]

Harrison and Austin filed an appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court against the county court decision to dismiss the complaint. They were represented by Richard F. Harless, Lemuel P. Mathews, and Ben B. Mathews. Laveen was represented by the Maricopa County Attorney Francis J. Donofrio and the Deputy Attorney Warren L. McCarthy. Amici curiae were filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, United States federal government, and National Congress of American Indians.^[3] On July 15, 1948, the Arizona Supreme Court unanimously overturned the superior court's decision, saying that the "persons under guardianship" phrasing in the state constitution applied only to judicial guardianship, and that the phrase "has no application to the plaintiffs or to the Federal status of Indians in Arizona as a class".^[5]

Aftermath

The overturn of Porter v. Hall meant that American Indians in Arizona had de jure suffrage. However, similar to the voting history of other minority groups in the US, other barriers prevented many from voting. Many natives in Arizona did not speak English, and thus could not access voting resources or pass English-language literacy tests. In 1948 it was estimated that 80–90% of Arizona Indians were illiterate and thus could not vote until literacy tests were made illegal in the 1970 Amendment to the Voting Rights Act.^[5]

Related Research Articles

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson during the height of the civil rights movement on August 6, 1965, and Congress later amended the Act five times to expand its protections. Designed to enforce the voting rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Act sought to secure the right to vote for racial minorities throughout the country, especially in the South. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act is considered to be the most effective piece of federal civil rights legislation ever enacted in the country. It is also "one of the most far-reaching pieces of civil rights legislation in U.S. history."

Maricopa County is in the south-central part of the U.S. state of Arizona. As of the 2020 census the population was 4,420,568, or about 62% of the state's total, making it the fourth-most populous county in the United States and the most populous county in Arizona, and making Arizona one of the nation's most centralized states. The county seat is Phoenix, the state capital and fifth-most populous city in the United States.

Laveen is a community in Maricopa County, Arizona, United States, situated eight miles (13 km) southwest of Downtown Phoenix, between South Mountain and the confluence of the Gila and Salt rivers. Parts of Laveen constitute an unincorporated community in Maricopa County, while the remainder falls within the city limits of Phoenix, constituting the city's "Laveen Village" an urban village within the city of Phoenix. Laveen Village is split between District 7 and District 8, both notable as minority-majority districts for the city. Although Laveen has been home to "pastoral alfalfa, cotton, and dairy farms" since the 1880s, housing and commercial developments have been increasingly urbanizing the area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arizona Supreme Court</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Arizona

The Arizona Supreme Court is the state supreme court of the U.S. state of Arizona. Sitting in the Supreme Court building in downtown Phoenix, the court consists of a chief justice, a vice chief justice, and five associate justices. Each justice is appointed by the governor of Arizona from a list recommended by a bipartisan commission. Justices stand for retention in an election two years after their appointment and then every six years. They must retire at age 70.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andrew Thomas (American politician)</span> American politician

Andrew Peyton Thomas is an American politician, author and former attorney. He was the county attorney for Maricopa County in Arizona from 2004 until April 6, 2010. During his term in office, he was known for his anti-illegal immigrant policies. On April 10, 2012, Thomas was disbarred by a disciplinary panel of the Arizona State Supreme Court for his actions as county attorney.

Joseph Henry Kibbey was an American attorney who served as Associate Justice of the Arizona Territorial Supreme Court from 1889 to 1893 and Governor of Arizona Territory from 1905 to 1909. His legal career is most remembered for his efforts in the area of water law, his key legal contributions being the "Kibbey Decision", a legal ruling establishing the principle that "water belongs to the land", and creation of the legal framework for the Salt River Valley Water User's Association, a model for federal water projects in the American West. As governor, Kibbey was a leader in the effort to prevent Arizona and New Mexico territories from being combined into a single U.S. state.

Thomas Charles Horne is an American politician, attorney, businessman, and activist who has served as the Arizona Superintendent of Public Instruction since 2023 and previously from 2003 to 2011. A Republican, he also served as the 25th Attorney General of Arizona from 2011 to 2015. Horne ran for reelection as Attorney General but lost to Mark Brnovich in the 2014 Republican primary. Horne was elected to another term as Superintendent of Public Instruction in 2022.

Same-sex marriage has been legally recognized in Colorado since October 7, 2014. Colorado's state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage was struck down in state district court on July 9, 2014, and by the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on July 23, 2014. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals had already made similar rulings with respect to such bans in Utah on June 25 and Oklahoma on July 18, which are binding precedents on courts in Colorado. On October 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the Tenth Circuit cases, and the Tenth Circuit lifted its stay. On October 7, 2014, the Colorado Supreme Court and the Tenth Circuit cleared the way for same-sex marriages to begin in Colorado.

Arizona is a state in the Southwestern United States. It is the 6th-largest and the 14th-most-populous of the 50 states. Its capital and largest city is Phoenix. Arizona is part of the Four Corners region with Utah to the north, Colorado to the northeast, and New Mexico to the east; its other neighboring states are Nevada to the northwest, California to the west and the Mexican states of Sonora and Baja California to the south and southwest.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Arizona since October 17, 2014. The U.S. state had denied marriage rights to same-sex couples by statute since 1996 and by an amendment to its State Constitution approved by voters in 2008. On October 17, Judge John W. Sedwick ruled in two lawsuits that Arizona's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, and enjoined the state from enforcing its ban, effective immediately. Attorney General Tom Horne said the state would not appeal that ruling, and instructed county clerks to comply and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Same-sex marriage has been legal in Mississippi since June 26, 2015. On November 25, 2014, U.S. District Court Judge Carlton W. Reeves of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi ruled that Mississippi's ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional. Enforcement of his ruling was stayed pending appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the denial of marriage rights to same-sex couples is unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution. On June 29, Attorney General Jim Hood ordered clerks to comply with the court ruling and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The Fifth Circuit lifted its stay on July 1, and Judge Reeves ordered an end to Mississippi's enforcement of its same-sex marriage ban. However, until July 2, 2015, several counties in Mississippi continued to refuse to issue marriage licenses, including DeSoto, Jasper, Jones, Newton, Pontotoc, Simpson and Yalobusha.

Mark Brnovich is an American attorney and politician who was the 26th Attorney General of Arizona from 2015 to 2023. A member of the Republican Party, he was an unsuccessful candidate for its nomination in the 2022 U.S. Senate election in Arizona. He is married to Susan Brnovich, a United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.

Webster Street was an American jurist who served as Chief Justice of the Arizona Territorial Supreme Court from 1897 till 1902.

This is a timeline of voting rights in the United States. The timeline highlights milestones when groups of people in the United States gained voting rights, and also documents aspects of disenfranchisement in the country.

Miguel H. Trujillo (1904–1989) was an American activist from the Laguna Pueblo Native American tribe, who was instrumental to the case Trujillo v. Garley in 1948; before the case, New Mexico, like many other states, had a ruling that "Indians not taxed" were not legally allowed to vote. With the case Miguel successfully challenged this ruling.

The 2022 Arizona Attorney General election took place on November 8, 2022, to elect the next attorney general of Arizona concurrently with other federal and state elections. Incumbent Republican attorney general Mark Brnovich was term-limited and could not seek a third term in office. With a margin of 0.01%, Democrat Kris Mayes defeated Republican Abe Hamadeh in one of the closest elections in Arizona history, and the closest attorney general race of the 2022 election cycle.

After the 2020 United States presidential election, the campaign for incumbent President Donald Trump and others filed and lost at least 63 lawsuits contesting election processes, vote counting, and the vote certification process in multiple states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Among the judges who dismissed the lawsuits were some appointed by Trump himself.

The movement for women's suffrage in Arizona began in the late 1800s. After women's suffrage was narrowly voted down at the 1891 Arizona Constitutional Convention, prominent suffragettes such as Josephine Brawley Hughes and Laura M. Johns formed the Arizona Suffrage Association and began touring the state campaigning for women's right to vote. Momentum built throughout the decade, and after a strenuous campaign in 1903, a woman's suffrage bill passed both houses of the legislature but was ultimately vetoed by Governor Alexander Oswald Brodie.

In direct response to election changes related to the COVID-19 pandemic, 2020 United States presidential election in Arizona, and "Sharpiegate"; the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign launched numerous lawsuits contesting the election processes of Arizona. All of these were either dismissed or dropped.

References

↑ Ferguson-Bohnee, Patty (November 2010). "The Struggle for Equal Voting Rights" (PDF). Arizona Attorney.
1 2 Guay, Kevin T. (2020). "The Landmark Decision of Harrison v. Laveen: Arizona Indians and the Right to Vote". Journal of the Southwest. 62 (3): 586–617. doi:10.1353/jsw.2020.0018. S2CID 229356155.
1 2 3 "Harrison v. Laveen". Case Text. Retrieved 1 January 2021.
↑ "Harry Austin, 2004 Inductee". Lower Verde Valley Hall of Fame. Retrieved 1 January 2021.
1 2 Ferguson-Bohnee, Patty. "THE HISTORY OF INDIAN VOTING RIGHTS IN ARIZONA: Overcoming Decades of Voter Suppression" (PDF). Arizona State Law Journal: 1099–1112.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] Ferguson-Bohnee, Patty (November 2010). "The Struggle for Equal Voting Rights" (PDF). Arizona Attorney.

[Guay-2] 1 2 Guay, Kevin T. (2020). "The Landmark Decision of Harrison v. Laveen: Arizona Indians and the Right to Vote". Journal of the Southwest. 62 (3): 586–617. doi:10.1353/jsw.2020.0018. S2CID 229356155.

[casetext-3] 1 2 3 "Harrison v. Laveen". Case Text. Retrieved 1 January 2021.

[4] "Harry Austin, 2004 Inductee". Lower Verde Valley Hall of Fame. Retrieved 1 January 2021.

[Ferguson-5] 1 2 Ferguson-Bohnee, Patty. "THE HISTORY OF INDIAN VOTING RIGHTS IN ARIZONA: Overcoming Decades of Voter Suppression" (PDF). Arizona State Law Journal: 1099–1112.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]