Biden DOJ sues Virginia

[Mik]

I think you are right about the outcome but I wonder two things. First, when did these registrants appear on the rolls, and second, how many of those end up voting.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in Biden DOJ sues Virginia:

Had he done this in June I’d agree with you. Rectification takes time. Might require getting a copy of your birth certificate. 90 days is totally reasonable, youngkin broke the law and will lose.

Whether he broke the law depends on the wording of the federal law which defines, in precise legalese, the actions prohibited within 90 days of an election. Is it really illegal to remove illegal voters from the rolls within 90 days of an election? I doubt it. Is it illegal to employ any process intended to remove illegals but which may remove others in error? We will let the courts decide, but it is obviously not a done deal until that decision is made.

[Copper]

@George-K said in Biden DOJ sues Virginia:

Without a passport or birth certificate, how do you prove citizenship?

A certificate of live birth, Mr. Obama for example.

[LuFins Dad]

@jon-nyc said in Biden DOJ sues Virginia:

Had he done this in June I’d agree with you. Rectification takes time. Might require getting a copy of your birth certificate. 90 days is totally reasonable, youngkin broke the law and will lose.

Evidently this has been going on for months. The fact that the guy has claimed he has proven his citizenship 5 times points to the fact that this goes back to before the 90 day window.

[jon-nyc]

Sure that’s fine. You just have to stop 90 days before the election. And they didn’t.

[taiwan_girl]

As is usually the case in politics, both sides do stupid stuff trying to prove they are the less stupid.

[George K]

@jon-nyc said in Biden DOJ sues Virginia:

Sure that’s fine. You just have to stop 90 days before the election. And they didn’t.

Again...

https://jonathanturley.org/2024/10/22/the-mark-of-kaine-the-biden-administration-under-fire-for-virginia-lawsuit-over-non-citizen-voter-removals/

Kaine’s administration specifically asked the Justice Department to determine if the law was compliant with federal laws, including an express inquiry about the NVRA.

On December 16, 2006, the Justice Department completed its review and found no objections to the Virginia law though it added that it reserves the right to object in the future to any such laws.

Gov. Youngkin further told Fox News that past governors continued to use the law within the 90 days period without a peep of objection from the Justice Department.

Is Youngkin lying?

[taiwan_girl]

From the article

The bipartisan legislation was signed into law by then Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine. It has been used without any objection for all those years.

I would be curious to see how many voters were removed in a similar time frame before other elections. If the answer is "zero", then maybe it does seem political. If the answer is a similar number (6000) to what is happening now, then it does seem to be okay.

[LuFins Dad]

[Horace]

Gee, and here I thought this was a slam dunk legal case.

I guess this must be just more evidence of an ideologically captured supreme court.

[Horace]

https://virginiamercury.com/2024/10/30/u-s-supreme-court-grants-stay-in-challenge-to-youngkins-voter-purge-order-allowing-removal-of-thousands-from-rolls/

The court’s six conservative justices supported the stay, with the three liberals dissenting.

How odd, one would have hoped that legal interpretations around these issues would be cut and dried. I wonder which set of justices were ruling with their hearts rather than their heads? Do you suppose it's the justices appointed by presidents who can't shut up about how government needs more heart?

[Mik]

I'm not sure how the federal government can pass laws dictating how the states will run their voter rolls. Have to admit I'm not very educated on how all that works together, but I suspect that is what the 6 justices' decision might be based on.