Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BumRushDaShow

(141,457 posts)
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:16 AM Oct 30

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

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/

77 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court clears way for Virginia to remove 1,600 alleged noncitizens from voter rolls (Original Post) BumRushDaShow Oct 30 OP
They are going to cheat for him. BlueKota Oct 30 #1
"I just hope our side has a plan to counteract their unconstitutional rulings." BumRushDaShow Oct 30 #2
I realize we have to do everything we can to get BlueKota Oct 30 #8
The SCOTUS generally upholds "states rights" which is a provision in the Constitution BumRushDaShow Oct 30 #15
So they were purged on day 90? LeftInTX Oct 30 #41
SCOTUSBlog has a better description of what was going on - BumRushDaShow Oct 30 #46
umm.Thanks for post. riversedge Oct 30 #64
Can valid voters appeal their removal? no_hypocrisy Oct 30 #3
Sort of MissMillie Oct 30 #27
Yes they can thatdemguy Oct 30 #35
In other words they need to re-register to vote on Election Day FakeNoose Oct 30 #65
WTF. What happened to States control elections. We are 6 days away from the general election, and the thugs on the JohnSJ Oct 30 #4
The case turned the interpretation and application of a federal law governing removal ofnames from a state's voter rolls onenote Oct 30 #18
I think you are giving this court the benefit of doubt. I will be JohnSJ Oct 30 #32
I said the Supreme Court's decision was indefensible. In what universe is that giving them the benefit of the doubt? onenote Oct 30 #44
Yes I did read it onenote, perhaps incorrectly, but based on the view that the court was properly brought into the case JohnSJ Oct 30 #47
They haven't "heard" the case yet. They've decided an emergency motion. onenote Oct 30 #49
Thanks. I don't think there is anyway the case will be heard before the election, and the only remedy for those purged JohnSJ Oct 30 #52
Correct. Which is one of several reasons it is an indefensible order. onenote Oct 30 #57
Thanks. Now I have a complete picture. JohnSJ Oct 30 #69
In many cases, the people being potentially removed indicated themselves they were not citizens MichMan Oct 30 #58
Then it isn't as straightforward as some of the OPs suggest. JohnSJ Oct 30 #70
It is no longer a stay, they are allowing the purge to continue. JohnSJ Oct 30 #39
It is a stay of the injunction ordered by the lower courts. onenote Oct 30 #45
Thanks. Appreciate the edification. JohnSJ Oct 30 #48
Not just men BlueKota Oct 30 #34
true, though her reasoning I think might be different than the men on that court. JohnSJ Oct 30 #38
Supreme Court allows Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations mahatmakanejeeves Oct 30 #5
While this isn't positive ScratchCat Oct 30 #6
So what's to stop them from doing 50K more tomorrow? IrishAfricanAmerican Oct 30 #42
Why didn't they do 50,000 before the ruling? onenote Oct 30 #50
Maybe they were testing the fences? IrishAfricanAmerican Oct 30 #68
These people weren't voting anyway at least the ones who stayed they couldn't vote underpants Oct 30 #60
It is time now to ignore the extreme six's illegal rulings. Clouds Passing Oct 30 #7
Who is going to ignore this ruling? The Virginia authorities that requested the ruling? onenote Oct 30 #51
I know they did, but I'm just sayin' I'm tired of their unlawful rulings. Clouds Passing Oct 30 #73
The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented from Wednesday's action. Dumpy Oct 30 #9
The only one old enough to consider retiring would be Thomas. oldsoftie Oct 30 #55
Expected FredGarvin Oct 30 #10
I don't trust they will allow a legitimate Harris win BlueKota Oct 30 #12
They have a major incentive to let Trump win Danascot Oct 30 #67
The order says all so called non citizens. So bluestarone Oct 30 #11
Good point. Maybe the order is more limited than the headline? nt wiggs Oct 30 #17
I guess IF i were from there and knew i was removed bluestarone Oct 30 #19
What can we do??? HagathaCrispy Oct 30 #13
Take a little solace in knowing MissMillie Oct 30 #25
These fuckers WILL install TFG bluestarone Oct 30 #14
I do to. BlueKota Oct 30 #20
Well, i still have some faith in our DU members that insist that it would be hard for THIS SC, IF bluestarone Oct 30 #21
There will be civil war if that happens HagathaCrispy Oct 30 #16
No. PSPS Oct 30 #56
What's the solution then BlueKota Oct 30 #72
Link to the Order: Ramsey Barner Oct 30 #22
Oh there is discussion alright. Just not with the people they are supposed to be discussing. It's called the fix. Hassin Bin Sober Oct 30 #40
harris is going to win et tu Oct 30 #23
I also think Harris will win. BlueKota Oct 30 #26
60 cases were heard following the last election. 59 were wins for the Dems. It was the same court we have now PortTack Oct 30 #33
Was Barrett involved in rejecting Trumps objections BlueKota Oct 30 #36
National Voter Registration Act SpankMe Oct 30 #24
roughly 2/3 of Alabama's illegal purge MissMillie Oct 30 #28
The Supreme Court MAY need protection! 3825-87867 Oct 30 #29
Why do they have to be removed now, today? LittleGirl Oct 30 #30
So, instead of determining if they are ineligible now, it would be better to let them vote and then throw them in jail ? MichMan Oct 30 #59
So out of 144ish million voters LittleGirl Oct 30 #71
Please explain how the checks and balances worked in the case I linked to? MichMan Oct 30 #75
Virginia has same day voter registration idahoblue Oct 30 #31
I was BRUTALLY HARASSED on another thread for asking the same questions asked here!!!! HagathaCrispy Oct 30 #37
You don't say! jfz9580m Oct 31 #77
SCOTUS actively supporting MAGA HereForTheParty Oct 30 #43
Fascist Shits Through And Through... MayReasonRule Oct 30 #53
Mark Elias can't fix this. gab13by13 Oct 30 #54
How does this affect us? Groundhawg Oct 30 #61
When the house reconvenes 1 Nov Farmer-Rick Oct 30 #62
@JoyceWhiteVance In a disgraceful departure from the so-called Purcell principle which SCOTUS uses to reject changes riversedge Oct 30 #63
Question: Will we be able to learn the detailed results of this purging? Gender, Party, precincts, ethnicity, Jit423 Oct 30 #66
It was youngkin demagogue to get attention with no basis by executive order to illegally purge 1600 Virgina voters. JohnSJ Oct 30 #74
If virginia has same day voter registration i dont see jow this is the biggest deal in practice ColinC Oct 30 #76

BlueKota

(3,547 posts)
1. They are going to cheat for him.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:22 AM
Oct 30

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

BumRushDaShow

(141,457 posts)
2. "I just hope our side has a plan to counteract their unconstitutional rulings."
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:30 AM
Oct 30

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

(3,547 posts)
8. I realize we have to do everything we can to get
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:42 AM
Oct 30

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

(141,457 posts)
15. The SCOTUS generally upholds "states rights" which is a provision in the Constitution
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:59 AM
Oct 30

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

(29,882 posts)
41. So they were purged on day 90?
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:12 PM
Oct 30

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

(141,457 posts)
46. SCOTUSBlog has a better description of what was going on -
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:27 PM
Oct 30
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.

thatdemguy

(506 posts)
35. Yes they can
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 11:23 AM
Oct 30

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

(35,516 posts)
65. In other words they need to re-register to vote on Election Day
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:44 PM
Oct 30

... 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

(96,414 posts)
4. WTF. What happened to States control elections. We are 6 days away from the general election, and the thugs on the
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:35 AM
Oct 30

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

(44,423 posts)
18. The case turned the interpretation and application of a federal law governing removal ofnames from a state's voter rolls
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:05 AM
Oct 30

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

(96,414 posts)
32. I think you are giving this court the benefit of doubt. I will be
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:57 AM
Oct 30

happy that my speculation is wrong.

onenote

(44,423 posts)
44. I said the Supreme Court's decision was indefensible. In what universe is that giving them the benefit of the doubt?
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:20 PM
Oct 30

Did you read my post?

JohnSJ

(96,414 posts)
47. Yes I did read it onenote, perhaps incorrectly, but based on the view that the court was properly brought into the case
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:31 PM
Oct 30

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

(44,423 posts)
49. They haven't "heard" the case yet. They've decided an emergency motion.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:35 PM
Oct 30

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

(96,414 posts)
52. Thanks. I don't think there is anyway the case will be heard before the election, and the only remedy for those purged
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:53 PM
Oct 30

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

(44,423 posts)
57. Correct. Which is one of several reasons it is an indefensible order.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:03 PM
Oct 30

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.

MichMan

(13,048 posts)
58. In many cases, the people being potentially removed indicated themselves they were not citizens
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:04 PM
Oct 30

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

(96,414 posts)
39. It is no longer a stay, they are allowing the purge to continue.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 11:48 AM
Oct 30
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

(44,423 posts)
45. It is a stay of the injunction ordered by the lower courts.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:25 PM
Oct 30

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.

mahatmakanejeeves

(60,685 posts)
5. Supreme Court allows Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:37 AM
Oct 30
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

(2,412 posts)
6. While this isn't positive
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:39 AM
Oct 30

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

underpants

(186,409 posts)
60. These people weren't voting anyway at least the ones who stayed they couldn't vote
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:17 PM
Oct 30

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

(2,077 posts)
73. I know they did, but I'm just sayin' I'm tired of their unlawful rulings.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 04:45 PM
Oct 30

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

(26 posts)
9. The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Its three liberal justices dissented from Wednesday's action.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:43 AM
Oct 30

If Trump wins and gets to appoint another justice.

 

oldsoftie

(13,538 posts)
55. The only one old enough to consider retiring would be Thomas.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:00 PM
Oct 30

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

(543 posts)
10. Expected
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:46 AM
Oct 30

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

Truly 3rd world stuff.

BlueKota

(3,547 posts)
12. I don't trust they will allow a legitimate Harris win
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:50 AM
Oct 30

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

(4,886 posts)
67. They have a major incentive to let Trump win
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 02:11 PM
Oct 30

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

(18,100 posts)
11. The order says all so called non citizens. So
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 09:49 AM
Oct 30

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

bluestarone

(18,100 posts)
19. I guess IF i were from there and knew i was removed
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:09 AM
Oct 30

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

MissMillie

(38,949 posts)
25. Take a little solace in knowing
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:37 AM
Oct 30

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.

BlueKota

(3,547 posts)
20. I do to.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:18 AM
Oct 30

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

(18,100 posts)
21. Well, i still have some faith in our DU members that insist that it would be hard for THIS SC, IF
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:29 AM
Oct 30

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.

PSPS

(14,116 posts)
56. No.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:01 PM
Oct 30

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

BlueKota

(3,547 posts)
72. What's the solution then
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 04:28 PM
Oct 30

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?

Hassin Bin Sober

(26,685 posts)
40. Oh there is discussion alright. Just not with the people they are supposed to be discussing. It's called the fix.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 12:07 PM
Oct 30

et tu

(1,877 posts)
23. harris is going to win
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:33 AM
Oct 30

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

(3,547 posts)
26. I also think Harris will win.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:41 AM
Oct 30

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

(34,488 posts)
33. 60 cases were heard following the last election. 59 were wins for the Dems. It was the same court we have now
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 11:06 AM
Oct 30

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

BlueKota

(3,547 posts)
36. Was Barrett involved in rejecting Trumps objections
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 11:25 AM
Oct 30

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

SpankMe

(3,221 posts)
24. National Voter Registration Act
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:34 AM
Oct 30

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.

3825-87867

(1,083 posts)
29. The Supreme Court MAY need protection!
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:49 AM
Oct 30

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

(8,395 posts)
30. Why do they have to be removed now, today?
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:51 AM
Oct 30

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

(13,048 posts)
59. So, instead of determining if they are ineligible now, it would be better to let them vote and then throw them in jail ?
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:16 PM
Oct 30

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

(8,395 posts)
71. So out of 144ish million voters
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 03:58 PM
Oct 30

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

(13,048 posts)
75. Please explain how the checks and balances worked in the case I linked to?
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 06:15 PM
Oct 30

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

(392 posts)
31. Virginia has same day voter registration
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 10:54 AM
Oct 30

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

(154 posts)
37. I was BRUTALLY HARASSED on another thread for asking the same questions asked here!!!!
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 11:31 AM
Oct 30
I was BRUTALLY HARASSED on another thread for asking the same questions asked here!!!!

Farmer-Rick

(11,223 posts)
62. When the house reconvenes 1 Nov
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:24 PM
Oct 30

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

(72,990 posts)
63. @JoyceWhiteVance In a disgraceful departure from the so-called Purcell principle which SCOTUS uses to reject changes
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:25 PM
Oct 30

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.








Jit423

(136 posts)
66. Question: Will we be able to learn the detailed results of this purging? Gender, Party, precincts, ethnicity,
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 01:46 PM
Oct 30

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

JohnSJ

(96,414 posts)
74. It was youngkin demagogue to get attention with no basis by executive order to illegally purge 1600 Virgina voters.
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 04:48 PM
Oct 30

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

(10,535 posts)
76. If virginia has same day voter registration i dont see jow this is the biggest deal in practice
Wed Oct 30, 2024, 06:19 PM
Oct 30

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

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Supreme Court clears way ...