Supreme Court: States can purge voters who don't vote or respond to warnings,

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
93,053
59,224
becoming more and more
#1
WASHINGTON -- Failing to vote can lead to getting knocked off voter registration rolls, a divided Supreme Court ruled Monday in a decision that likely will help Republicans and harm Democrats.

The court's conservative majority ruled 5-4 that Ohio did not violate federal laws by purging voters who don't vote and fail to return notices confirming their residency. Civil rights groups had challenged the state for having the strictest method of purging voters in the nation.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/11/supreme-court-states-purge-voters-who-dont-vote/587316002/

the operatives words being "conservative majority". How do the figure this is constitutional? This is a big deal. And yet another example of how elections have consequences.
 
Jan 2014
18,141
5,160
California
#2
WASHINGTON -- Failing to vote can lead to getting knocked off voter registration rolls, a divided Supreme Court ruled Monday in a decision that likely will help Republicans and harm Democrats.

The court's conservative majority ruled 5-4 that Ohio did not violate federal laws by purging voters who don't vote and fail to return notices confirming their residency. Civil rights groups had challenged the state for having the strictest method of purging voters in the nation.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/11/supreme-court-states-purge-voters-who-dont-vote/587316002/

the operatives words being "conservative majority". How do the figure this is constitutional? This is a big deal. And yet another example of how elections have consequences.
The Watchman,

Makes sense. Makes you wonder what goes through the minds of the whack jobs on the court in the minority.
 
Likes: 1 person
Jan 2014
18,141
5,160
California
#5
This is, IMO a really big, really rotten deal.

Mr. RNG,

I can't see why you, nor anybody else would have a problem with this. If they have not voted in 3 consecutive elections, it means either they have no interest in participating in the electoral process, or most likely, they have moved and are no longer in that jurisdiction and have probably re-registered in another place.
 

the watchman

Former Staff
Jul 2011
93,053
59,224
becoming more and more
#9
How do you figure it is not?
let's start with the fact that it was a 5 - 4 vote with the conservatives winning out because they're in the majority. Then, let's move on to the dissenting opinions, penned by Breyer
Justice Stephen Breyer penned an 18-page dissent for the liberal wing of the court, marking the sixth time this term they have dissented as a bloc. Rather than focusing on inaccurate voter rolls, he recited the history of literacy tests, poll taxes and other restrictions he said were designed to "keep certain groups of citizens from voting."

Breyer noted that most voters simply ignore the warning notices, leaving their failure to vote as the principal cause for being purged from the rolls. The number who don't vote and don't return notices far exceeds the number who actually have moved, he said.

"The streets of Ohio's cities are not filled with moving vans; nor has Cleveland become the nation's residential moving companies' headquarters," Breyer said. Rather, Ohio's process "erects needless hurdles to voting of the kind Congress sought to eliminate."
 
Jan 2014
18,141
5,160
California
#10
let's start with the fact that it was a 5 - 4 vote with the conservatives winning out because they're in the majority. Then, let's move on to the dissenting opinions, penned by Breyer
The Watchman,

Just because 4 justices are whack jobs, how do you figure it isn't constitutional? I mean, by definition, if the SCOUS says it is constitutional, it is constitutional.
 
Likes: 1 person