Supreme Court Greenlights Ohio's Voter Purge Policy

[DonViejo]

Source: Talking Points Memo



By Tierney Sneed | June 11, 2018 10:12 am

The Supreme Court on Monday approved of Ohio’s voter purge protocol, reversing an appeals court decision against it.

The 5-4 opinion was written by Justice Samuel Alito, with the four liberal justices dissenting.

The Ohio policy allows election officials to begin the purge process once a voter does not vote in a certain period of time. Under the regime, if a voter sits out one federal election, they are sent a notification from the state inquiring whether they still reside at the same address. If the voter does not return the card and sits out the next four years of federal elections, Ohio then removes them from the voter rolls.

Opponents of the policy argued that it violated the National Voter Registration Act’s provision prohibiting the removal of voters “by reason of the person’s failure to vote.”

Read more: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/supreme-court-ohio-voter-purge

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Gorsuch is illegitimate

because the seat was stolen and he was nominated by an election thief

Just sayin'

[lagomorph777]

3. This is what happens when we let them get away with stealing.

We should've taken the nuclear option to confirm Garland.

[MichMan]

30. How does the nuclear option force Garland to be confirmed?

Please explain how the Democrats could have used the nuclear option to confirm Garland?

Of course he should have received an up or down vote, but the Senate is not obligated to confirm. If the Republicans would have scheduled a vote and he was voted down on party lines, he still wouldn't have been confirmed.

[lagomorph777]

35. I think there would have been a few honest ones remaining.

But yeah, I guess nuclear wasn't an option when we didn't even have a slim majority.

[mountain grammy]

40. There should have been a vote..

Yes, that should have been forced. This was a huge mistake to ride it out.

Democrats are guilty of overestimating the intelligence of American voters, or non voters as the case may be.

[onenote]

44. How would a vote been "forced"?

[mountain grammy]

49. With a lot of noise, that wasn't made..

Obama had a 60% approval rating that last year, I think it was even higher.. He should have been on the stump about this. I do believe enough pressure would have resulted in a vote.. but we'll never know, will we?

I honestly don't know, but it seems the "trump can never win" idea played a big part in decisions made in 2016.

[MichMan]

55. Even if there was a vote, doubt the Republican's would have voted to confirm

Either way the seat would have been vacant

[appalachiablue]

62. +5 Recognition of the real intelligence level of Americans & voters is off.

[yurbud]

45. Mitchell precipitated a constitutional crisis. Obama should have upped the ante:

"Since the Republicans in Congress have refused to even hold hearings on Justice Garland in a reasonable amount of time, I have no choice but to swear him in WITHOUT their advice or consent. If they have a problem with that, they can impeach him."

[TimeSnowDemos]

6. Literally

Just sayin'.

I think back to all the times I've heard Americans claim that if THEY had lived in Germany in 1939 things would be different.

Instead Trump has proven America is a weak, soft target, and that Americans aren't going to do much to stop crooks, except moan on social media and wait for a savior.

[MBS]

10. Yes, unfortunately.

[mountain grammy]

41. Yep!

[StevieM]

14. Gorsuch is illegitimate because Comey and the FBI targeted the Democratic candidate

and destroyed her reputation. You cannot have an election on those terms.

So all of Trump's policies and nominees are illegitimate.

[leftynyc]

18. Meanwhile he's got a lifetime appointment

and there is nothing you can do about it. How about putting the blame where it belongs - on the purity police who just couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary.

[StevieM]

20. I am not happy with the HRC-bashers in our own party who treated her unfairly IMO.

But I am not going to let Comey off the hook.

I hope the Inspector General's report coming out on June 14 will help to address this matter.

[leftynyc]

26. I don't let comey off the hook at all

In fact, many of those purity morons used him and his investigation to go after hillary.

[yurbud]

46. Is the candidate at all responsible for not earning votes from past OBAMA voters?

[StevieM]

52. She was about to win those voters, along with past ROMNEY voters. Then Comey intervened.

Again. He intervened against her over and over, going back to 2015.

It is hard to win an election when people believe you broke the law and got away with it. Comey is the one who made that happen through his misconduct. I hope the IG report will clarify that.

[MarcA]

38. Some States could say No in those 5-4 decisions n/t

[former9thward]

64. No.

We had a civil war about that. Remember?

[dameatball]

2. Absolute nonsense. If a person chooses not to vote for ten years, so what?

[elleng]

5. Of course it is, but Ohio's been after 'them'/us for years,

and now it's 'officially' ok.

They are definitely not into democracy.

[JohnnyRingo]

24. Yes, now expect Ohio to push further.

Since they're now allowed to take voters off the roll for not voting in two federal cycles, expect the Ohio Sec of State to move people off for missing one cycle.

Hope is not lost however, Mike DeWine, the architect of this policy, is an aging and weak candidate for governor. I believe Cordray has a better than even chance of being our next governor. This Supreme Court decision will then be moot in Ohio. Unfortunately, other states were no doubt following this case closely.

[Iliyah]

31. "officially" ok, until it works in Dems favor

then they will call foul and go back to the US SC to re-do it.

[Igel]

53. It depends.

Did they not vote because they died? Moved?

Those are common reasons not to vote for 10 years.

It inflates the rolls. My usual example is where I grew up. If the hadn't purged me from the rolls, I'd still be on them from 1978. As well as everybody who was registered in 1978 or any later year. I don't know anybody there now. It went from 3500 people to 3500 people, but transitioned from prosperous working class to moderately poor lower class to mixed, staunchly middle or upper-middle, in those 40 years. It would have had maybe 2600 voting-age people in 1978, and probably about the same amount now. All those who registered since then would be easily over 10000. So if 100% of the voters voted, there'd be perhaps a 20% voter-turnout.

It would also easily allow for all kinds of people to vote by mail using fake names. And if an additional 1000 people voted who weren't alive or living there, it would just bring the voters up to 30% or so of the electorate.

Heck, by now I'd be able to cast ballots in Baltimore County, Newark (DE), Hoboken (NJ), Brighton (NY), a couple of places in Eugene (OR), in Los Angeles, and a couple of places around Houston. The voting population of the US, total population 330 million or so, would be well over a couple billion.

At the same time, it's easy to return the card. Register on line. Go to the Post Office and get a registration card. Register through the DMV or whatever the motor-vehicles/drivers-license folk are called in your neck of the woods. Even post-purge, it's very likely that a voter could still cast a provisional ballot. (And while the CT folk love to say they're *never* counted, "they're always counted" is far closer to the truth, provided that the information is accurate and the ballot filled out correctly.)

[dameatball]

54. I understand that. But if I have not moved, etc., why should I jump through hoops to vote?

I grew up in Florida. I now live in Virginia. Does anyone really think I am going to drive 13 hours to illegally add one vote??

Oh well, rules are rules I suppose. I actually think it is now six years.

[TimeSnowDemos]

4. Who's surprised?

No one.

As has happened over and over in US history, voting rights are either stripped away from or never granted to certain groups.

Why?

To drive down participation.

Not that it really matter in America, which is hardly a properly functioning democracy.

Still, even in that context, this is depressing.

[JohnnyRingo]

28. "When people vote, democrats win."

I don't know how many times I've heard that, and it's true. That's because people who identify with democratic principles outnumber republicans by far. The problem is... we don't vote. We have every excuse not to, and I've heard them all because I make a point to enlist at least two people who have never cast a vote every election. Even then, getting them into the booth on election day can be an uphill push all the way.

On the other hand, those raised in conservative homes vote as a family birthright. They're taught from an young age that even if there's nothing on the ballot except dogcatcher, they must get their asses in there early and vote for the republican dogcatcher.

[TimeSnowDemos]

29. Yes but

Millions of democrats have had their votes stolen, millions more face voter suppression... And frankly millions of poor people and minorities think there's not much point. The US system is so very cruel, under both parties, that it's hard to not at least have sympathy.

Dems are many millions of times better than GOPers, which is pretty obvious, but for millions it truly is the difference between starving and being starved.

[yurbud]

47. where were the Democrats on this?

[RandySF]

7. I'm so glad everyone was paying attention to the courtd

While they cast their symbolic votes for Jill Stein in 2016.

[leftynyc]

19. +1000

[we can do it]

27. Stein Sanders Nader- conscience voters go to hell.

They’ve fucked over the entire world.
Worse than stupid people who support drump.

[Freethinker65]

8. Is this a uniform policy for all voters regardless of of age, ethnicity, location of residence?

Or can this be used arbitrarily (perhaps against a certain subset of the voting public known to statistically prefer one political party and/or ideology to another)?

I do not like the policy, as it seems to try to infer a problem (voter fraud) that does not exist, but if used uniformly to clean up voter rolls from people that have moved from last voting and registered to vote elsewhere, it appears on its face to be reasonable.

Of course, the intent of the legislation is to depress the Democratic vote.

[Autumn]

11. Agree, but why on earth would someone sit out voting for 10 years? I can't

Last edited Mon Jun 11, 2018, 11:33 AM - Edit history (1)

see anyone doing that purposely.

[More_Cowbell]

32. It can be not voting for two years

A midterm election and the general election. Miss the two of those and you're out.

I hope this backfires and people never miss another election. That's bound to help the Democrats.

[Autumn]

34. That clears that up. I took it to mean a mid term and 2 federal.

[LanternWaste]

43. What precisely, is reasonable about a implementing solution lacking a problem?

"it seems to try to infer a problem (voter fraud) that does not exist, but if used uniformly to clean up voter rolls from people that have moved from last voting and registered to vote elsewhere, it appears on its face to be reasonable..."

What precisely, is reasonable about a implementing solution lacking a problem? Seems more a simplistic rationalization to me...

[Freethinker65]

50. I think the GOP will use the decision to claim voter fraud is rampant when it is not

I think cleaning up voter rolls from those that have moved or died is legitimate for recordkeeping purposes.

As an example- I was called to jury duty in Michigan about three years after I had moved from Michigan to Illinois. I had an Illinois drivers license and was registered to vote in Illinois, but had never personally informed Michigan I had moved. My father was still on the voting rolls in Michigan two years after he died out of state. I happened to intercept a postcard sent to his last known address (a rarely used summer cabin) and informed the county. My mother recently became a legal resident of Utah. I have a feeling she is probably still on the older voting rolls.

I have no problem with a process to maintain current voter rolls. I do have a problem with arbitrarily devising a system that is intended to suppress the vote, and that is what I believe the GOP is trying to do.

[aggiesal]

9. This is Vote Caging, pure and simple ...

(If you don't know what vote caging is, google it.)

It's been happening here in San Diego for some time now.

The Republican party gets a hold of the Democratic Party voter registration list,
then mails out a card that looks official, requesting the voter to sign to verify the
voter registration information listed and mail back, otherwise, risk being removed
from the voter rolls.

If the voter doesn't sign, then the Republican Party records that the person did
not sign and contests the vote, if their signature appears as voting during the
election.

They concentrate on the Military personnel (which there are a lot of in SD), and
the elderly.

The ROV does this regularly here in SD as well. But they send it to everyone.

[FakeNoose]

56. Maybe the Democratic Party can do the same thing?

It sounds a little underhanded, but nobody is going to court to stop the GOP, so what they're doing must be legal. The Dems need to do the same thing and disqualify Republican votes wherever possible. Maybe the Republicans will stop this nonsense. After all, they're disqualifying military people who usually vote Republican, am I right?

A better strategy would be to put out PSA's and let everyone know that they can re-register before the election. There should be a way to go online and check to make sure voters have a valid registration. If not, you still have time to register before the election. The PSA's can be worded as non-partisan since they would be true for all voters, not just Democrats.

[Grins]

12. 5-4 decision...?

Lemmee guess who cast those five votes....

[byronius]

13. Pretty damned disgusting and unAmerican on its face.

It's become very clear that their approaching and permanent minority makes Republicans willing to do anything, literally.

[hibbing]

15. Ridiculous n/t

[MurrayDelph]

16. When Alito was nominated

The Senate floated a filibuster. As I was still living in California, I wrote to Feinstein asking her to join the filibuster (she didn't, but later bragged about voting against him on the floor). The answer I got back was basically, "Back off, sonny! I'm a Senator; I know more than you do."

Apparently not.

[leftynyc]

17. Congrats to all the purity trolls

who stayed home or voted 3rd party. YOU are as responsible for this as every right winger that voted for donnie.

[lancelyons]

22. as well as every democrat who stayed home or think their vote doesnt count.

[lancelyons]

21. The GOP has been very successful in this regard

I hate saying this but the GOP approach to taking over many of the state houses and senates, Stealing the supreme court nominee, voter suppression, etc, etc is all planned out by the GOP to take the country back from the evil liberals who are moving away from God and supporting LGBTQ, minorities, etc.

This is the GOP idea. They used Russia as leverage (money, hacking, etc) to make this happen and are therefore complicit in the entire scenario. The EU and Canada are just liberal countries that need to be eliminated to converted. They started this in England with Brexit.

Anybody that doesnt think this is a larger GOP push that has been under plan and being worked for the past 10 years are delussional.


I keep getting surveys from the DNC asking whats the most important thing to me.

Healthcare, equal treatment of minorities, lgtbtq, free education, etc, etc.

I am more interested in taking back the house, senate and presidency and then cleaning house of the GOP that are working with Russians to undermine our country. We have to change this course. Find the COMMIES and put them in jail. This isnt just i vote blue you vote red whopity do. This is a war on the Red side to take back their country from the evil liberals.

I hope we are ready to fight

This is discouraging.

If you get a notice that your voter registration might be purged, you better get off yourass and do something about it. It makes a difference.

[IronLionZion]

23. 5-4 decisions like this make me want to find any liberal who didn't vote Dem

and punch them in the face

[Ohiogal]

25. I am disgusted beyond words at this.

[lastlib]

33. Time for a Voting Rights Amendment to the Constitution!

Cast our right to be HEARD and COUNTED in cement!!

(These f&ucking Repuglikans make me -- -- -- -- -- )

[pecosbob]

36. News said 80% of registered voters failed to respond to the mailer

Want to bet on who gets purged and who doesn't?

[MichMan]

60. Let me guess, the ones that didn't respond?

[YOHABLO]

37. Okay so now people like Kobach can go through the voter rolls and kick people off. Great.

Granted I always vote in (at least) the general elections. I honestly don't understand why someone wouldn't want to express their right to vote. But there's nothing in the Constitution that makes voting mandatory.

[Dorn]

39. We keep taking step after step toward the dark side

Maybe now we have a vote over country as well as fly over country: people who are ignored by the people who vote. I can think of many times I might have been kicked off the voter roles.

[mountain grammy]

42. This court will destroy all American progress and freedom.

I expect the return of apartheid and the establishment of religious rule with the help of Gorsuch and the conservative/Nazi justices.

[Initech]

57. And that's the plan.

The Koch Brothers should just declare themselves supreme emperors and get it over with.

[minstrel76]

48. Starting to seriously consider leaving the U.S.

And never coming back.

[Initech]

58. I would if I could.

I at least want to leave the county I'm in - I'm surrounded by MAGAholes, Trumplodytes, Blue Lives Matter fans, crazy religious nuts, and Fox Bots. You'd think it was rural Alabama here.

[Hoyt]

51. If you vote, you don't get purged. If you check your registration, you won't have a problem.

Democrats need to focus on getting people registered, checking their registration and getting out the vote.

Apparently, Ohio followed federal law -- they have to wait 6 years to purge non-voters and send them notification of pending removal. Even if you are purged, you can re-register on-line in a few minutes.

While I think this ruling might hurt Democrats short-term, the impact will be small if we get people registered and get them to vote. Do that and they can purge voters who haven't voted in 6 years all they want, but it won't do them any good because we will still win.

If people still aren't going to vote after the 2016 election results, trying to stop purging isn't going to do us much good.

[MichMan]

59. Or just reply to the damn postcard mailing ....

[DeminPennswoods]

61. Hate to break this to everyone, but lots of municipalities

purge voter rolls and have for years. I know in Philadelphia, if you didn't vote for two consecutive presidential election cycles, iirc, your name was deleted from the voter rolls. To me, and I was an election board judge, this is not an unreasonable period of time to register or re-register if you are interested in voting.

If no one was ever purged from the voting rolls, the rolls would be massive and have a lot of incorrect information. People move and don't bother to have themselves removed from the voting rolls of their old precinct to their new one. People die. People change their names. There has to be a way to manage these changes.

[jb5150]

63. What's needed is a

standardized set of rules for how voter roles are maintained.