Park v. State
This text of 528 P.2d 785 (Park v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alaska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION
The question presented in this appeal is whether an alien who is a permanent resident of Alaska may be precluded from voting in state elections.
The facts of this case are not disputed. Appellant has been a bona fide resident of Alaska since 1959. He is not a citizen of *786 the United States, but since 1969 he has been a permanent resident alien. In August of 1974 he filed an application for naturalization with the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the United States.
Appellant was admitted to the practice of law in Alaska in 1971 by virtue of this court’s decision in Application of Park, 484 P.2d 690 (1971) and has been practicing law in this state since that time. He holds a commission as a notary public for the State of Alaska. He is also a taxpayer and property owner.
Earlier this year appellant applied to the appropriate state officials for registration as a voter in the state primary and general elections. His application was denied on the ground that, although he was qualified in every other respect, he was not a citizen of the United States, as required by Alaska statute. 1
Appellant filed a declaratory judgment action in the superior court on June 4, 1974, and sought an injunction requiring his registration as a voter. Shortly thereafter he sought summary judgment 2 From an adverse determination by the superior court, Park brings this appeal.
On appeal it is asserted that the state’s requirement of citizenship as a voter qualification denies to appellant the equal protection of the laws, as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. 3
As the trial court noted, the Alaska Constitution is dispositive of this question as a matter of Alaska law. Article 5, Section 1, of the Alaska Constitution provides:
“Every citizen of the United States who is at least eighteen years of age, who meets registration residency requirements which may be prescribed by law, and who is qualified to vote under this article, may vote in any state or local election. A voter shall have been, immediately preceding the election, a thirty day resident of the election district in which he seeks to vote, except that for purposes of voting for President and Vice President of the United States other residency requirements may be prescribed by law. Additional voting qualifications may be prescribed by law for bond issue elections of political subdivisions.”
The plain meaning of this language limits the voting privilege to citizens of the United States. Appellant argues that this conflicts with the equal protection clause of the Alaska Constitution contained in Article 1, Section l. 4 We find no such conflict. It is a well accepted principle of judicial construction that, whenever reasonably possible, every provision of the *787 Constitution should be given meaning and effect, and related provisions should be harmonized. See e. g. Otsuka v. Hite, 64 Cal.2d 596, 51 Cal.Rptr. 284, 414 P.2d 412, 421 (1966). It must be assumed that the drafters of our Constitution considered that the qualifications for voting stated in Article 5, Section 1, did not create a classification prohibited by the declaration of rights in Article 1, Section 1, as the provisions were adopted concurrently. Thus, under express language of Article 5, Section 1, aliens are excluded from voting in the State of Alaska.
The only remaining question is whether the federal constitution somehow invalidates the Alaska constitutional provision. Appellant asserts that the equal protection clause of the federal constitution requires that he be afforded the privilege of voting in Alaska.
It is true that aliens are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. See e. g. Takahashi v. Fish and Game Commission, 334 U.S. 410, 419-420, 68 S.Ct. 1138, 92 L.Ed. 1478 (1948). It is also established that aliens are a discrete and insular minority and classifications based on alienage are subject to close judicial scrutiny. Sugarman v. Dougall, 413 U.S. 634, 642, 93 S.Ct. 2842, 37 L.Ed.2d 853 (1973). Nevertheless, it has long been recognized that states have the power to establish conditions of suffrage, provided that such conditions do not contravene any constitutionally protected rights. 5 For example, the Fourteenth Amendment in one clause prohibits the states from abridging the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, but in other clauses relating to due process of law and equal protection of the laws extends its prohibitions against the states to encompass all “persons.” Similarly the Fifteenth, Nineteenth, Twenty-Fourth, and Twenty-Sixth Amendments of the United States Constitution, 6 guarantee the right of citizens of the United States to vote without regard to race, color, previous condition of servitude, sex, payment of poll tax or other tax, and guarantee the right of voting to citizens who are 18 years of age or older. Because all of these voting rights are applied expressly only to citizens, the necessary implication is that such rights are not available to aliens. 7
No judicial decision is contrary to this interpretation. . Indeed the United States Supreme Court, while recognizing other *788 rights possessed by aliens under the equal protection clause, has been careful to point out in dictum that the states are not restricted in using citizenship as a proper criterion of the right to vote. The court noted in Sugarman v. Dougall, 413 U.S. 634, 648-649, 93 S.Ct. 2842, 2851, 37 L.Ed.2d 853 (1973),
“This Court has never held that aliens have a constitutional right to vote or to hold high public office under the equal protection clause. Indeed, implicit in many of this court’s voting rights decisions is the notion that citizenship is a permissible criterion for limiting such rights.”
Appellant cites us to no judicial decisions in either state or federal courts which establish a federal right on the part of aliens to vote in state elections. In our opinion, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not guarantee state voting rights for aliens. We hold, therefore, that appellant was properly excluded from registration as a voter in the State of Alaska.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
528 P.2d 785, 1974 Alas. LEXIS 334, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/park-v-state-alaska-1974.