SCOTUS upholds Ohio on purging voter rolls

SCOTUS upholds Ohio on purging voter rolls

[Ed. – The special pleading here is hilarious.  Does anyone doubt that the main demographic groups affected will be dead people, and voters registered on the fly as “Mickey Mouse” and “Santa Claus”?  (Plus, admittedly, those three dozen people registered for vote-by-mail ballots at the same single-family-residential address.)]

The 5-4 ruling found that Ohio’s practice of stripping voters from its rolls if they don’t vote over a six-year period and don’t respond to mailed warnings did not violate federal law.

Writing for all the court’s Republican appointees, Justice Samuel Alito said Ohio’s process of sending a notice to people who don’t vote during a two-year period, then removing them if they don’t respond to a second notice or vote in the next two federal general elections, complies with the requirements Congress set out back in 1993. …

The decision could embolden red states to be more aggressive about policing their voter rolls. Voting rights advocates say such practices disproportionately remove minority and younger voters. These groups tend to move more often than older white voters, and some younger voters accustomed to doing business online may be less attentive to so-called snail mail.

Trending: Mother needs something to throw during argument, chooses her baby

Continue reading →

For your convenience, you may leave commments below using either the Spot.IM commenting system or the Facebook commenting system. If Spot.IM is not appearing for you, please disable AdBlock to leave a comment.


Commenting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.