I only mention the 2nd amendment because that debate is shifting towards why do people "need" guns, as a way of shaming gun owners into having to justify why they want guns.
You brought up the idea that Arizona didn't need to prove records, they only needed to verify facts.
It was the use of the word "need" that triggered my analogy to the 2nd amendment debate.
Debating the "need" to exercise Constitutional rights is a slippery slope that runs the risk of, again, letting the Left dictate the language of the debate. First, it was the need to own guns, now it's the need to prove the public records of other states, next it will be the need to freely exercise religion (Obamacare abortions), speak freely (Obama threatening the press), peaceably assemble (DHS stockpiling ammo), petition the government (nobody has standing), be secure from unlawful search (TSA) or the taking of one's property (wealthiest 1% - I'm waiting for the confiscation of my 401(k)).