The Supreme Court is allowing Virginia to resume its purge of voter registrations that the state says is aimed at stopping people who aren't U.S. citizens from voting.
Folks in Virginia, please don’t be discouraged. Get out and vote! Remember what the governor said:
Youngkin said voters who believe they were improperly removed from the rolls can still vote in the election because Virginia has same-day registration.
“And so there is the ultimate, ultimate safeguard in Virginia, no one is being precluded from voting, and therefore, I encourage every single citizen go vote,” Youngkin told reporters.
In the other bit of “less bad” news, it seems like the Supreme Court didn’t explain the reason for the decision, so that means it doesn’t directly on its own set any legal precedents for the future if I’m understanding correctly.
One thing to remember is that the bar for the SC to explain themselves is low. It’s probably much higher in the court of public opinion than it is in … you know, actual courts. (Since the lower courts have to follow their words and not the other way around.) When they do speak, there’s very little that can stop them.
They could have said something like, “We find that the mere option of same-day voting registration being available is enough to satisfy the intent of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act and thus the 90-day rule should be treated as not being violated.”
That would have opened the doors for Republican States to purge their rolls the same way as Virginia has, while enacting same-day voting registration on paper (thus providing the option) - but combined with ridiculous ID rules that make it next to impossible to actually do so.
Or worse, they could have said “We find that a non citizen voting is in fact unconstitutional, and for that reason we overturn this part of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act - the 90 day rule may no longer be enforced.”
Folks in Virginia, please don’t be discouraged. Get out and vote! Remember what the governor said:
In the other bit of “less bad” news, it seems like the Supreme Court didn’t explain the reason for the decision, so that means it doesn’t directly on its own set any legal precedents for the future if I’m understanding correctly.
What could they say, though? “We know you’re breaking federal law and all that but carry on. Those votes won’t suppress themselves.”
One thing to remember is that the bar for the SC to explain themselves is low. It’s probably much higher in the court of public opinion than it is in … you know, actual courts. (Since the lower courts have to follow their words and not the other way around.) When they do speak, there’s very little that can stop them.
They could have said something like, “We find that the mere option of same-day voting registration being available is enough to satisfy the intent of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act and thus the 90-day rule should be treated as not being violated.”
That would have opened the doors for Republican States to purge their rolls the same way as Virginia has, while enacting same-day voting registration on paper (thus providing the option) - but combined with ridiculous ID rules that make it next to impossible to actually do so.
Or worse, they could have said “We find that a non citizen voting is in fact unconstitutional, and for that reason we overturn this part of the 1993 National Voter Registration Act - the 90 day rule may no longer be enforced.”