Posted on 06/03/2017 11:56:49 AM PDT by jazusamo
The Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Ohios Clean Voter Rolls Case
Soros Watch
Judicial Watch Uncovers Shocking New Clinton Emails
You might think that everyone wants integrity in elections. That, as you know, is naïve, as events in Ohio and other states demonstrate. We were encouraged this week, however, when the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari and agreed to hear a case related to Ohios efforts to maintain accurate voting rolls.
The citizens of Ohio may yet see their right to clean and fair elections upheld. Clearly, dirty election rolls can mean dirty elections. We hope that the Supreme Court will reverse the Sixth Circuit decision and allow Ohio to more easily remove ineligible names from its voter registration lists.
Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court supporting Ohios efforts to ensure that its voter rolls are up to date. The case was on appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which held Ohios process is in violation of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 ( NVRA ) ( Jon Husted, Ohio Secretary of State v. Philip Randolph Institute, et al. (No. 16-980)).
Our amicus brief argues that the Sixth Circuit ruling would adversely affect its settlement agreement with Ohio were it allowed to stand:
In January of 2014 the parties settled the lawsuit, agreeing to terms for Ohio to perform certain NVRA Section 8 list maintenance practices through November 2018. A key provision of this Settlement Agreement was Ohios agreement to perform an annual list maintenance Supplemental Mailing to voters who had no contact with Ohios election offices in two years. The Settlement Agreement required Ohio to send the Supplemental Mailing every year, whereas Ohio had previously been sending the mailing every two years. The Supplemental Mailing portion of the Settlement Agreement was so important to the parties that they subsequently negotiated an amendment solely to give Ohio greater flexibility over which month of the year to initiate the Supplemental Mailing.
Judicial Watch never would have agreed to the Settlement Agreement with Ohio and dismissed its lawsuit if it believed that the Supplemental Mailing was legally impermissible. If the Sixth Circuits ruling in this case is allowed to stand, this key provision of Judicial Watchs Settlement Agreement could be voided.
Judicial Watch Attorney Robert Popper, the director of our Election Integrity Project, joined with five other former attorneys of the Civil Rights Division Attorneys of the Justice Department to file an amici curiae brief in the Husted case.
That the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Ohio election integrity dispute is a great sign, because it shows that the Supreme Court has noticed and cares about the issue and also because it means there is a fair chance now for the Sixth Circuits flawed ruling to be reversed on appeal. You can bet Judicial Watch will continue to brief the High Court on the importance of election integrity laws as this appeal proceeds.
Off the Wall Ping!
Contact to be added.
DJT Ohio +8%. Too much for NAZI Soros to overcome.
6th circuit just got a new jurist
Was it an obozo appointee?
Legal voters are disenfranchised if illegal voters are not vetted.
Good to use the legal system for a this.
Not to mention that America is the gold standard for democracy for the world.
We cannot allow our electoral process to be anything but pure. It’s OK to have standards to ensure a process that the world can aspire.
From an earlier thread.......
During the first three months of this year, WV has purged 47,490 from the rolls.
That leaves 1,233,703 voters....for now.
A second round is underway.
http://wvmetronews.com/2017/04/20/sos-mac-warner-clerks-purges-voters-rolls-in-wv/
With WV having an official population of 1,844,128 as of 2016, I do not see that 1,233,703 total of registered voters staying that high.
No the first conservative appointive of the Trump administration. DJT nominated ten Mc Connell put the one from his district through first Only 110 left to nominate (McConnell refused to move 81 of the obama nominees forward )
Agreed, seems pretty improbable.
Thanks for the ping
That purge was about a 4% reduction in registered voters.
Imagine if similar results were to be had nationwide.
Not only would we be talking about the effects on *local* elections, but national elections could easily be held in the balance.
4% of registered voter’s ballots being “up for grabs” is absurd.
.
Bump!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.