Supreme Court clears way for Virginia to remove 1,600 alleged noncitizens from voter rolls

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CBS News

Updated on: October 30, 2024 / 10:05 AM EDT


Washington — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed Virginia to move forward with its removal of roughly 1,600 alleged noncitizens from its voter rolls just days before the 2024 election.

The high court granted a request from state officials to pause a lower court order that blocked Virginia from continuing its systematic voter removal program that was launched in August, exactly 90 days before Election Day. A provision of the National Voter Registration Act requires states to complete programs aimed at purging ineligible voters from registration lists up to 90 days before federal elections.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson said they would have denied the request from Virginia officials. Virginia officials had asked the Supreme Court to grant its request for emergency relief by Tuesday. They claimed that the district court's order violates Virginia law "and common sense," and "mandates a variety of disruptive measures."

The injunction issued by the lower court will harm "Virginia's sovereignty, confuse her voters, overload her election machinery and administrators, and likely lead noncitizens to think they are permitted to vote, a criminal offense that will cancel the franchise of eligible voters," state officials wrote. Federal and Virginia law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-virginia-voter-rolls/

[BlueKota]

1. They are going to cheat for him.

They cannot be trusted. I just hope our side has a plan to counteract their unconstitutional rulings.

[BumRushDaShow]

2. "I just hope our side has a plan to counteract their unconstitutional rulings."

The only way to "counteract" those rulings is to keep the Presidency and the Senate, and take back the House. Then we can start implementing SCOTUS ethics reforms that have bills already drafted, among other things.

[BlueKota]

8. I realize we have to do everything we can to get

Democrats elected. My concern is what if the Supreme Court throws out the legitimate will of the majority of voters, on a made up technicality? No one seems to have an answer as to what can we do then. We can't just assume they will do the right thing because they have already proven they don't deserve blind trust.

How can we expect the Constitution to protect us when they are basically setting it on fire without any consequences or way for us to legally do anything to stop them? Do we just throw up our hands and surrender like the Germans did when Hitler took over?

It scares the shit 😳 out of me that there seems to be no one in our leadership preparing for that possibility.

[BumRushDaShow]

15. The SCOTUS generally upholds "states rights" which is a provision in the Constitution

and it looks like a "technicality" here was that this had been done "on day 90".

No one seems to have an answer as to what can we do then.

Democrats drafted (and passed in the House), these 2 comprehensive voting-related bills that would hopefully take many of the loopholes away AND address nonsense like what happened in VA. Unfortunately the bills died in the Senate because Manchin and Sinema did not want to change the 60-vote threshold to allow a simple majority for certain legislation to move forward to debate.

H.R.1 - For the People Act of 2021

H.R.4 - John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2021

[LeftInTX]

41. So they were purged on day 90?

I know non-citizens need more investigation than other issues, mainly because it involves more resources and hence the court case.

But if it was on day 90, at least SCOTUS didn't throw out the Voter Registration Act.

[BumRushDaShow]

46. SCOTUSBlog has a better description of what was going on -

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/10/supreme-court-allows-virginia-to-remove-suspected-non-citizens-from-voter-rolls/

Apparently this wasn't quite decided on "the merits" but was merely allowing what was done to proceed, subject to it still going through the appeals process. The argument has been the state claiming that what they did was under the exceptions provision of the federal law ("individualized removal" - e.g., purging if someone moved out of the state, or died, or asked to be removed, etc.) vs as a "systematic removal", that the government was arguing was happening during that post-90 day "quiet period".

This issue of accusing people of being "non-citizens" is a red-herring thing that is addressed in the "For the People Act" that the House passed in 2021, but that died in the Senate (not making it past the 60 vote threshold).

H.R.1 - For the People Act of 2021

We really need that bill to get all the way to the President's desk! It also addressed the nightmare of "Citizen's United" and campaign finance reform.

It's stuff like this that gets litigated that shows why legislation can often be thousands of pages long in order to try to cover what could become a "loophole" to be exploited.

[riversedge]

64. umm.Thanks for post.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Can valid voters appeal their removal?

[MissMillie]

27. Sort of

There is same-day registration in VA

[thatdemguy]

35. Yes they can

Just provide proof of citizenship. A birth certificate or a SS card should do it, and I am sure there are other ways as well.

Now as someone born in VA getting a copy of your BC is easy, just go to MVA and fill out paper work, it takes 10 mins. I had to get copies of mine a few years ago, lets hope any voters who do not have a copy go get it.

They used two things to remove voters, the federal list of those here that are not citizens, and those who checked off that they were not citizens. I am sure some of those who checked it did it by accident, but looks like its an easy fix.

[FakeNoose]

65. In other words they need to re-register to vote on Election Day

... which is reassuring, but not many people carry their birth certificate with them. I actually carry my US Passport with me, because it's the best form of ID that I have, but it doesn't show my address. I would need a 2nd photo ID on me in order to register to vote.

The answer is: yes it's possible but how many Americans will bother?

The Repukes don't even know how many of their own voters they've removed. They just assume that these "illegals" all vote D, so we'll get rid of them.

[JohnSJ]

4. WTF. What happened to States control elections. We are 6 days away from the general election, and the thugs on the

SC want to get involved.

You know who the ones who are garbage? It is the deplorable MEN on the SC. They have demonstrated their racism, by whittling down the voting and civil rights act, and the sexism by the Dobb's decision. They have demonstrated their lawlessness by their immunity ruling for criminal activities of a president.

THIS IS WHY WE MUST WIN THIS ELECTION.

[onenote]

18. The case turned the interpretation and application of a federal law governing removal ofnames from a state's voter rolls

Under this federal law, a state "shall complete, not later than 90 days prior to the date of a primary or general election for Federal office, any program the purpose of which is to systematically remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters."

I'm going to assume that you don't actually have a problem with the federal government passing a law to protect voters in federal elections from being removed from voter rolls so close to the election date that they are likely not to have time to challenge or correct the removal decision.

I think the court's issuing a stay of the lower court rulings finding that Virginia violated this provision is indefensible, but there is no question that the court was properly brought into this case which involved the application and interpretation of a federal law governing federal elections.

[JohnSJ]

32. I think you are giving this court the benefit of doubt. I will be

happy that my speculation is wrong.

[onenote]

44. I said the Supreme Court's decision was indefensible. In what universe is that giving them the benefit of the doubt?

Did you read my post?

[JohnSJ]

47. Yes I did read it onenote, perhaps incorrectly, but based on the view that the court was properly brought into the case

because it involved the application and interpretation of federal law governing federal election, I don't think that was the reason THIS SC heard the case. In my speculation, it was simply an excuse to allow the purging of votes, which Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson disagreed with.

[onenote]

49. They haven't "heard" the case yet. They've decided an emergency motion.

They had two choices: grant the motion or deny the motion. In my view, despite what you somehow perceived from my post, granting the motion was indefensible. They should have denied it. But even if they had denied it, the case would still be pending and the court would still have an opportunity to decide whether to take it if and when a formal petition for certiorari was filed. Again, I think the only correct answer in that instance would be to deny the certiorari petition. But not because it isn't a proper question for the federal courts to address, but because the lower courts addressed it correctly.

[JohnSJ]

52. Thanks. I don't think there is anyway the case will be heard before the election, and the only remedy for those purged

voters will be to re-register ASAP.

What I don't understand, when someone registers to vote, at least in California, election officials determines if you are eligible to vote, and validates your information.

To vote in California you have to be a US citizen, resident of California, 18 years old, etc.

Don't all states have similar requirements?

What I am saying is I don't understand how a third party can challenge someone's eligibility to vote. Shouldn't that be done by state officials?

[onenote]

57. Correct. Which is one of several reasons it is an indefensible order.

Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2024, 03:33 PM - Edit history (1)

You have to be a US citizen to register in Virginia. The problem arises in several ways. Sometimes a person doesn't check the box on the registration form that says they are a citizen because they simply failed to see it. Other times, they check the box, but other records maintained by the state contradict that claim. While that might reflect an attempt to knowingly register despite not being a citizen, it often is the result of the records being in correct or out of date. Youngkin's order directed daily purging, so in effect someone who submits their registration form and doesn't check the box is weeded out the next day. Of course, that person might have inadvertently failed to check the box despite actually being a citizen -- there are reports of that happening not infrequently.

No third party was challenging the specific registrations. The purging was being carried out pursuant to Virginia state law and an executive order from Youngkin. The parties to the case were a private entity that defends the right to vote on one side, urging the court to put the purging on hold, and state officials on the other side.

[JohnSJ]

69. Thanks. Now I have a complete picture.

[MichMan]

58. In many cases, the people being potentially removed indicated themselves they were not citizens

As far as I know, it is based on their own statements. They failed to respond to letters requesting that they provide documentation.

One of the scenarios I heard was that some people thought if they said they were non citizens, they wouldn't be called for jury duty. If that is the case then play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Don't know if there was any validity to that claim or just speculation.

[JohnSJ]

70. Then it isn't as straightforward as some of the OPs suggest.

[JohnSJ]

39. It is no longer a stay, they are allowing the purge to continue.

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-virginia-voter-registration-purge-ba3d785d9d2d169d9c02207a42893757

"WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court’s conservative majority on Wednesday allowed Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations that the state says is aimed at stopping people who are not U.S. citizens from voting.

The high court, over the dissents of the three liberal justices, granted an emergency appeal from Virginia’s Republican administration led by Gov. Glenn Youngkin. The court provided no rationale for its action, which is typical in emergency appeals.

The justices acted on Virginia’s appeal after a federal judge found that the state illegally purged more than 1,600 voter registrations in the past two months. A federal appeals court had previously allowed the judge’s order to remain in effect."

[onenote]

45. It is a stay of the injunction ordered by the lower courts.

I get that legal terminology can be confusing. And the effect of the stay is to allow the purge to continue. But its still a stay.

Here is the order:

The application for stay presented to The Chief Justice and by him referred to the Court is granted. The October 25, 2024order of the United States District Court for the EasternDistrict of Virginia, case Nos. 1:24-cv-1778 and 1:24-cv-1807, is stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.
Justice Sotomayor, Justice Kagan, and Justice Jackson, would deny the application.

[JohnSJ]

48. Thanks. Appreciate the edification.

[BlueKota]

34. Not just men

ACB voted with them

[JohnSJ]

38. true, though her reasoning I think might be different than the men on that court.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. Supreme Court allows Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations

Politics
Supreme Court allows Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations

By MARK SHERMAN
Updated 10:16 AM EDT, October 30, 2024

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations that the state says is aimed at stopping people who are not U.S. citizens from voting.

The justices, over the dissents of the three liberal justices, granted an emergency appeal from Virginia’s Republican administration led by Gov. Glenn Youngkin. The court provided no rationale for its action, which is typical in emergency appeals.

The justices acted on Virginia’s appeal after a federal judge found that the state illegally purged more than 1,600 voter registrations in the past two months. A federal appeals court had previously allowed the judge’s order to remain in effect.

Such voting is rare in American elections, but the specter of immigrants voting illegally has been a main part of the political messaging this year from former President Donald Trump and other Republicans.

{snip}

[ScratchCat]

6. While this isn't positive

Most analysts say it will likely have no affect upon the outcome because it involves so few voters.

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

42. So what's to stop them from doing 50K more tomorrow?

Apparently the law isn't enough.

[onenote]

50. Why didn't they do 50,000 before the ruling?

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

68. Maybe they were testing the fences?

[underpants]

60. These people weren't voting anyway at least the ones who stayed they couldn't vote

This is a technical glitch of the Commonwealth’s systems not talking to each other correctly that’s being exploited by Youngkin and Miyares.

[Clouds Passing]

7. It is time now to ignore the extreme six's illegal rulings.

[onenote]

51. Who is going to ignore this ruling? The Virginia authorities that requested the ruling?

[Clouds Passing]

73. I know they did, but I'm just sayin' I'm tired of their unlawful rulings.

They ignore the Constitution. They ignore laws passed by Congress and State Legislatures. Six people are making our laws void based on illogical and unlawful reasoning. It’s time to ignore the rulings of the unelected six.

[Dumpy]

9. The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented from Wednesday's action.

If Trump wins and gets to appoint another justice.

[oldsoftie]

55. The only one old enough to consider retiring would be Thomas.

I cant see the 3 liberal justices even considering letting his fat ass replace them. Unless someone passes.
Let's take away that scary possibility by electing Harris!!

[FredGarvin]

10. Expected

Trump and Republicans are going to use the courts and propaganda to steal elections.

Truly 3rd world stuff.

[BlueKota]

12. I don't trust they will allow a legitimate Harris win

to stand. They lied under oath about Roe, they gave Trump immunity. What more do they have to do to prove that they are only loyal to tsf and not the Constitution?

[Danascot]

67. They have a major incentive to let Trump win

because if we sweep the president and congress we will add justices and their power to do whatever the f*** they want will go away. Plus, if the dems are in charge it is more likely that the financial corruption exhibited by a couple of the justices will be investigated and based on the outcome they could be impeached.

[bluestarone]

11. The order says all so called non citizens. So

Is there any recourse for anyone removed, that IS a citizen? Who knows for sure?

[wiggs]

17. Good point. Maybe the order is more limited than the headline? nt

[bluestarone]

19. I guess IF i were from there and knew i was removed

I would be getting with a Democratic legal person before it's too late!! Anyone of them need to DO THIS!

[HagathaCrispy]

13. What can we do???

Nt

[MissMillie]

25. Take a little solace in knowing

that VA has same-day registration.Anyone who was erroneously removed from the rolls can still vote provisionally.

But remain very worried that SCOTUS (with zero explanation) just gave states the right to violate Federal election law.

And also be worried about what new restrictions these erroneously removed voters will face when they try to re-register.

[bluestarone]

14. These fuckers WILL install TFG

I feel it!

[BlueKota]

20. I do to.

And apparently there is nothing that will be done to stop them because our leaders will decide to do nothing. They will insist on sticking to rules that the other side will have already violated, even if Harris and Democrats win by a landslide and the SC 6 ignores the vote and installs him on a made up technicality.

Why are people so willing to accept that?
I still think all Democrats, Independents, and disenfranchised old guard Republicans should vote for Democrats, but again what do we do, if the SC decides to over-rule the election results even as a result of a Democratic landslide? Even if we win the House and the Senate I doubt we will have enough to impeach the 6, and tsf will probably ignore the House and the Senate anyway.

I just feel like this is too eerily similar to what happened in Germany in 1930's and 40's. That too many are in denial. They think that it could never happen here even though there is evidence that it is happening before our very eyes. I don't get why people think it's okay to sit back and say oh well, if it happens it happens. What about all the lives tsf will destroy? I voted and I donated and I have spoken out, but I want to feel at least relatively assured that something will be done to at least try to stop the cult if the 6 throw out our votes after?

[bluestarone]

21. Well, i still have some faith in our DU members that insist that it would be hard for THIS SC, IF

WE win by a large number. I guess i keep in my mind the Supreme courts order was NON CITIZENS, which is the right order, BUT how do we know if they are really Non-citizens? What are the thoughts on this from the Democrats that are citizens of Virginia? Hope we hear their thoghts soon.

[HagathaCrispy]

16. There will be civil war if that happens

There will be civil war if that happens right

[PSPS]

56. No.

It's somewhat amusing but still sad that there are so many people on DU anxious to have a "civil war."

[BlueKota]

72. What's the solution then

if Trump either wins legitimately or has the SC come up with an excuse to invalidate a Harris win?

Do we just let them install a modern day Nazi Regime and do nothing to stop it, even if they start killing immigrants, and gays and everyone they happen to hate? That's not hyperbole because they are basically admitting that is what they will do if given a chance.

The answer cannot be we will vote them out in 2026 because Trump has already said he intends to end voting. I don't believe anyone wants a civil war, but isn't it just as immoral to let dictators persecute others and do nothing? What's your answer if the radical right starts turning their stated desire into vengeance and and violence? We just sit back and not try to stop it? What happened to "evil flourishes when good men do nothing" or "when the came for the Jews I did nothing, because I was not Jew?" Is it right for all of us to do nothing if the horrific nightmare starts to become real, if they don't come for us specifically, but we let them do what they want no matter how despicable to others? How does that seriously make us better than them either. I genuinely want for someone to answer me that?

[Ramsey Barner]

22. Link to the Order:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/103024zr_f2ah.pdf

[It's astonishing that the Supreme Court issues orders that can have such huge impacts without any discussion or rationale.]

[Hassin Bin Sober]

40. Oh there is discussion alright. Just not with the people they are supposed to be discussing. It's called the fix.

[et tu]

23. harris is going to win

and win big!!!! va. trying to make waves won't
stand a chance to the dems big beautiful blue tsunami!!!
va. performance- just a small ripple in a small pond

[BlueKota]

26. I also think Harris will win.

My concern is the SC6 arbitrarily throwing out a Harris win even if it's by a landslide on a made up technicality. They have proven they are not loyal to the people or the Constitution just their Donny Boy.

They don't fear impeachment because it's not likely even if we keep Senate leadership and take back the House, we have enough votes to keep them from blocking SC impeachments.

[PortTack]

33. 60 cases were heard following the last election. 59 were wins for the Dems. It was the same court we have now

I don’t think what you are saying is possible, even for these shills.

[BlueKota]

36. Was Barrett involved in rejecting Trumps objections

to the 2020 elections? I know some here have said she wasn't on the court yet, but she was confirmed before election.

[SpankMe]

24. National Voter Registration Act

The subject law disallows the removal - within 90 days of an election - of eligible voters who have changed their address, and a small number of other situations involving legal voter registrations.

But, as I read things this morning, the law allows the removal of other registrants who are not eligible to vote, such as non-citizens, felons, kids, ghost/fake registrations, dead people, etc., at any time...even within that 90-day window.

But, what about mass purges that encompass both invalid/ineligible registrations as well as registrations that are legal, intact and covered by the 90-day rule? How can the SoS (or whichever elections entity) assure the public that all of the registrations being purged don't include any of these 90-day exceptions?

I think the article said that the parties suing had found legal registrations within he list of purged voters. I think the law needs a tweak.

[MissMillie]

28. roughly 2/3 of Alabama's illegal purge

removed legally registered voters.

[3825-87867]

29. The Supreme Court MAY need protection!

Some might argue that a person could be upset enough at this to do something rash and/or illegal.
The best solution to this would be to have our president safely relocate the Justices to a secure location unknown to anyone and with no contact until after the election...for their own good and safety!

Biden should worry about their safety and should take appropriate action to protect them. The only safe way would be to hide them from the public and keep them totally incommunicado until after the election.

It might mean a delay in a ruling, but wouldn't that be better than having a few of them hurt or worse?

[LittleGirl]

30. Why do they have to be removed now, today?

Because if they are non-citizens, their vote (if they cast one) will be caught and they will be prosecuted for voting! This is pure theatre! If they leave those 1600 on the rolls, what harm will it do? As long as none of these supposed "non-citizens" don't vote, just purge them after the election. They are trying to cheat BEFORE THE ELECTION. This is stupidity at its finest.

[MichMan]

59. So, instead of determining if they are ineligible now, it would be better to let them vote and then throw them in jail ?

Last edited Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:55 PM - Edit history (1)

Wouldn't that be considered entrapment?

Just had a case in Michigan where someone who was a non citizen voted and their vote still counts

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/10/30/chinese-university-of-michigan-college-student-voted-presidential-election-michigan-china-benson/75936701007/

[LittleGirl]

71. So out of 144ish million voters

One person, one non-citizen voted and we should be upset that we caught them?

There are loads of checks and balances in voter rolls nationwide. If you're on the voter roll and you vote, your vote is still vetted. Maybe not by Election Day, but soon after. Like 2020, Georgia recount their votes 3 times! AZ had their votes counted and verified 3 times! There has been a handful of incidents of persons voting that shouldn't and those family members turning in ballots of the deceased, but we're talking about a handful of votes. Nothing that would determine a presidential election. (Of course, there is always that one exception...) so my point is, why are they worried about the voter rolls now. After the ballots have been printed and early voting has started. Just vet your votes as they come in. That's why we have election workers. That's why they are non-partisan workers. TRUST THE PEOPLE COUNTING THE VOTES or you get all kinds of conspiracies floating around that serves no one. Change the subject.

What we need to do is stop this crap about early voting restrictions. Everyone should have 30 days to vote. Mail in, in person, you name it. Make it so easy there is no excuse for NOT VOTING. We can tabulate those totals much easier than in one 24 hour day.

The only way we can keep our republic is if we make it easier to vote instead of harder.

I've been an immigrant in another country. I never once tried to vote in another countries' election abroad. I am not that stupid. Immigrants only vote when they become citizens. Except for that one case you mentioned. sigh.

[MichMan]

75. Please explain how the checks and balances worked in the case I linked to?

All they had to do was sign an affidavit stating they were a citizen. They were not vetted for citizenship, still voted and their vote still counts.

The only reason anyone knows about it is because the illegal voter called the election board themselves and asked for their ballot back. Otherwise the election staff wouldn't have known at all. It probably is quite rare, but if they aren't doing any verification, how do they be so certain?

[idahoblue]

31. Virginia has same day voter registration

But it is a provisional ballot.
Everyone who does same day registration needs to register as an independent or republican so they do not discard their ballot. I am very suspicious of the process. How is a provisional ballot a secret ballot?

The one bright spot in Idaho is same day registration and no provisional ballots. All ballots are counted.

[HagathaCrispy]

37. I was BRUTALLY HARASSED on another thread for asking the same questions asked here!!!!

I was BRUTALLY HARASSED on another thread for asking the same questions asked here!!!!

[jfz9580m]

77. You don't say!

Brutally harassed no less!!!
Are you okay?

[HereForTheParty]

43. SCOTUS actively supporting MAGA

Damn.

[MayReasonRule]

53. Fascist Shits Through And Through...

May Darwin serve us well.

[gab13by13]

54. Mark Elias can't fix this.

[Groundhawg]

61. How does this affect us?

[Farmer-Rick]

62. When the house reconvenes 1 Nov

A Dem should file a motion to vacate the chair. Johnson and Trump are plotting to overthrow the will of the people in their little secret. They are going to try and throw the election to their f*cking buddies on the Supreme Court.

And you know the Supremes will bow down to their Nazi masters every chance they get. Well at least 6 of them will. Hell, Thomas has conspired with Putin at Putin's golden Palace to bring down our democracy. And Alito would fly a swastika at his fancy house if his neighbors wouldn't object.

[riversedge]

63. @JoyceWhiteVance In a disgraceful departure from the so-called Purcell principle which SCOTUS uses to reject changes

I wrote just yesterday that I did not think they would take the case so close to the election!!



@JoyceWhiteVance
In a disgraceful departure from the so-called Purcell principle which SCOTUS uses to reject changes too close to elections, they will permit Virginia to continue to remove voters from the rolls. The liberal justices all dissent.

Link to tweet

[Jit423]

66. Question: Will we be able to learn the detailed results of this purging? Gender, Party, precincts, ethnicity,

actual citizenship status, age? Who do we have checking the accuracy of the results?

[JohnSJ]

74. It was youngkin demagogue to get attention with no basis by executive order to illegally purge 1600 Virgina voters.

It won't change the outcome of the election in Virgina, but is disgraceful of the SC.

Those purged voters will need to re-register to vote ASAP.

The best message we can send to the SC is do everything we can to insure Harris-Walz and Democrats WIN.

[ColinC]

76. If virginia has same day voter registration i dont see jow this is the biggest deal in practice

...unless somebody cannot actually prove they are a citizen I guess