╌>

A federal judge has ordered Alabama to stop trying to purge voters before Election Day

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  hallux  •  one month ago  •  49 comments

By:   Hansi Lo Wang - NPR

A federal judge has ordered Alabama to stop trying to purge voters before Election Day

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


A federal judge on Wednesday   temporarily blocked Alabama’s voter removal program in one of the major legal fights over voter purges in Republican-led states ahead of this fall’s Election Day.

The   court ruling   comes after the Justice Department and civil rights groups represented by the Campaign Legal Center   challenged   what the office of Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen, a Republican,   has called   “strategic efforts” to “remove noncitizens registered to vote” from the state’s voter rolls.

A federal law known as the   National Voter Registration Act   bans Alabama and other states from systematically removing people from their lists of registered voters within 90 days of a federal election, also known as the “quiet period” before Election Day.

In August, 84 days before Election Day, Allen announced a process for purging 3,251 registered Alabama voters who had been issued noncitizen identification numbers by the Department of Homeland Security. Non-U.S. citizens are not allowed to vote in federal and state elections. But among those put on the path to removal, Allen   acknowledged , are U.S. citizens who were naturalized and are eligible to vote.

In the decision, U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump, ruled that the state violated the NVRA’s “quiet period” provision and ordered Allen to put the voter removal program on pause through Nov. 5.

“This year, Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen (1) blew the deadline when he announced a purge program to begin eighty-four days before the 2024 General Election, (2) later admitted that his purge list included thousands of United States citizens (in addition to far fewer noncitizens, who are ineligible to vote), and (3) in any event, referred everyone on the purge list to the Alabama Attorney General for criminal investigation,” Manasco wrote in the court order.

Similar lawsuits have been filed in Virginia by   the Justice Department , as well as   the Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights . They are challenging   an August executive order   by Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin that calls for “daily updates” to the state’s voter list in order to remove “individuals who are unable to verify that they are citizens” to Virginia’s Department of Motor Vehicles.

The timing of the voter removals under the order violated the NVRA’s “quiet period” restriction, Virginia’s challengers argue. In court filings, they also point out that the DMV data used to determine a voter’s U.S. citizenship status can be wrong or out of date.

Youngkin, in a   statement , called the DOJ lawsuit “a desperate attempt to attack the legitimacy of the elections” in Virginia.

That was echoed by Trump, who has been pushing   baseless allegations of widespread noncitizen voting   while campaigning for a second term. Providing no evidence, Trump said in a post on his social media platform that the Justice Department’s legal challenge is one of “the Greatest Examples of DOJ Weaponization” that was done to “CHEAT on the Election” by putting “Illegal Voters” back on Virginia’s voter rolls.

Another potential legal fight over recent voter purges is brewing in Ohio. Voting rights groups led by the American Civil Liberties Union   sent a letter   dated Oct. 3 to Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, a Republican, pointing to mass voter removals in some of the state’s counties that they argue did not follow NVRA requirements. The groups said they’re prepared to go to court if changes are not made within 20 days.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Hallux    one month ago

             "U.S. District Judge Anna Manasco, who was nominated by former President Donald Trump..."

I have nothing to add.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Hallux @1    one month ago

I read elsewhere that, I think it was Georgia, not sure, that the judge rejected the, initiative or whatever you would call it, of having all votes HAND counted on election day.  

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Tessylo @1.1    one month ago

a maga stall tactic designed to run certification past the deadline so the anti-democracy crowd can drag it into a friendly court ...

no worries, those maga bottom feeders that want to interfere in a free and fair election by obstructing the results won't have any protection after all is said and done ...

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2  Sean Treacy    one month ago

The Biden DOJ is fighting to keep illegal aliens registered to vote before an election.  Literally attacking election integrity.  

The only things the Biden DOJ does at this point is harass Donald Trump and conservative protesters, catholics who prefer latin mass and protect illegal aliens. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one month ago

The DoJ in this case is sticking to the letter of the law, is this a problem?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.2  devangelical  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one month ago

there's probably enough fact free bullshit in that comment to fertilize every desert on the planet.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.3  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one month ago
The Biden DOJ is fighting to keep illegal aliens registered to vote before an election.

Prove it.

Literally attacking election integrity.  

No that was the State of Alabama.

The only things the Biden DOJ does at this point is harass Donald Trump and conservative protesters, catholics who prefer latin mass and protect illegal aliens. 

Not a good look, Sean, not good at all.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.3.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @2.3    one month ago

Prove it.

The seed already did.

at was the State of Alabama

Sure, in bizarro land. 

Not a good look, Sean, not good at all.

It is a terrible look for the DOJ to have become so politicized. Who knows how long it will take to recover its repuation.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
2.3.2  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.3.1    one month ago
The seed already did.

No it did not.

The state violated the NVRA, period, they missed the deadline. That should be the end of any discussion.

Then Allen actually admitted that some of the people slated for removal were eligible to vote.

But among those put on the path to removal, Allen      acknowledged  , are U.S. citizens who were naturalized and are eligible to vote.

How fucked up is that for

“strategic efforts” to “remove noncitizens registered to vote” from the state’s voter rolls."

One must assume that poll workers can identify and stop someone with a non citizen ID from working, but no,

Allen can't help himself.  Being on the rolls is not important, the effort is just grandstanding for the base.

Ditto, Virginia's daily updates must be paused for 90 day prior to 11/05/2024.

It is a terrible look for the DOJ to have become so politicized. 

They are prosecuting Federal election law, it's not political at all.

Who knows how long it will take to recover its repuation.

You are confused by partisanship and pointless references to Catholics and Mass in Latin.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @2    one month ago
The Biden DOJ is fighting to keep illegal aliens registered to vote before an election

Neither the president nor the DOJ register anyone to vote.

Are you claiming that the state of Alabama has been registering illegal aliens to vote in presidential elections? Or for any other purpose?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @2.4    one month ago
either the president nor the DOJ register anyone to vote.

Right. That's why I wrote "keep" 

u claiming that the state of Alabama has been registering illegal aliens to vote in presidential elections

Obviously. Mistakes will alway happen and making it easier for illegals to register  is one of the purposes behind the NVRA Democrats passed in 1993. All you have to do is fill out a postcard. 

The question is why the Biden administration won't allow states like Alabama or Virginia to fix those mistakes and protect the integrity of the election. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
2.4.2  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.4.1    one month ago
making it easier for illegals to register is one of the purposes behind the NVRA Democrats passed in 1993

Well, that's either COMPLETE BULLSHIT, or Democrats are really bad at their supposed "purposes" because as EVERY FUCKING investigation has shown and even Trumps own handpicked Attorney General said there is " no evidence of widespread voter fraud". Disputing Trump, Barr says no widespread election fraud | AP News

I think it's a pretty safe bet to accept that your ridiculous claim is COMPLETE BULLSHIT" after looking at the facts. But of course, Trump supporters HATE facts almost as much as they hate liberals and progressives because FACTS keep proving them wrong and stupid and complete gullible morons which are the exact type of voter Trump sought out and loves because they are so fucking easy to manipulate.

"We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated." - Donald J Trump

Again, there is NO law that Democrats have supported that makes it "easier for illegals to register" to vote, that is a fucking lie and the worthless scum who make that claim should be ashamed of themselves because they KNOW they're lying. But I guess some people will do and say anything to support their candidate even if they're a convicted felon. Or rather, I guess a convicted felon's supporters know they have to lie if they expect their candidate to win.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.3  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.4.1    one month ago
making it easier for illegals to register  is one of the purposes behind the NVRA Democrats passed in 1993

Source?

You know that bill passed with bipartisan support.

The question is why the Biden administration won't allow states like Alabama or Virginia to fix those mistakes and protect the integrity of the election.

Again, it’s not the Biden administration doing it. It’s a Trump-appointed federal judge enforcing federal law. 

I would say the real questions are 1) where is the proof that illegal aliens are registered to vote - and voting - in Alabama or Virginia and 2) why, in 30 years have they not bothered to fix it until right now? They could have done this a year ago and it would have been fine. Now, you want to act like Biden is stopping them. Biden isn’t even involved. They were sued by civil rights groups.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.4  Tacos!  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.4.2    one month ago
Well, that's either COMPLETE BULLSHIT, or

Oh, it’s definitely complete bullshit.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.3    one month ago
gain, it’s not the Biden administration doing it.

Lol.  Who is suing the states? 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.6  Tessylo  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.4.2    one month ago
'Or rather, I guess a convicted felon's supporters know they have to lie if they expect their candidate to win.'

Bingo.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.4.7  Sparty On  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.4.5    one month ago

Let it go Sean.    

As we all know, there is no election fraud.    Can’t be.    

No way.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.8  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @2.4.7    one month ago
As we all know, there is no election fraud.    Can’t be.

Yeah, no one said that, though.

The way you guys move the goalposts every time someone pushes back on the BS is hilarious…or sad. It’s one of them.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.4.9  Sparty On  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.8    one month ago

Allowing non citizens to vote is election fraud.

No amount of spin can change that reality.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.10  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @2.4.9    one month ago
Allowing non citizens to vote is election fraud.

It would be, if anyone “allowed” it. Can you identify someone who has allowed it?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.4.11  Sparty On  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.10    one month ago

No but that answer is problematic for a number of reasons.   The first being can you identify a truly “thorough, independent and unbiased” investigation to find such fraud?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.4.12  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.3    one month ago

They are being sued by the Biden DOJ

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.13  Tacos!  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.12    one month ago
They are being sued by the Biden DOJ

and civil rights groups. They are not being sued by “the Biden administration.” In spite of what Trump believes - or would like to be true - the Justice Department operates pretty independently from the president. It could be more independent than it is - and many think it should be - but the president is not launching or directing DOJ  investigations into state election law.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.14  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.13    one month ago

are not being sued by “the Biden administration.” 

The DOJ is part of the Executive Branch. It is as part of the Biden administration as its possible to be. 

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
2.4.15  bugsy  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.13    one month ago
but the president is not launching or directing DOJ  investigations into state election law.

You know this for sure how?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
2.4.16  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.13    one month ago
but the president is not launching or directing DOJ  investigations into state election law.

Nor is he stopping or condemning it.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
2.4.17  evilone  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.13    one month ago
They are not being sued by “the Biden administration.” In spite of what Trump believes - or would like to be true - the Justice Department operates pretty independently from the president.

So they think Uncle Joe is so feeble and senile as to not be able to function day-to-day WH functions, but he can micromanage the DoJ? I truly don't understand the logic of these people.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
2.4.18  evilone  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.16    one month ago
Nor is he stopping or condemning it.

Nor should he if the DoJ is supposed to be independent.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.19  Tacos!  replied to  evilone @2.4.17    one month ago

It’s called “trying to have it both ways.”

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
2.4.20  Tacos!  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.4.14    one month ago
It is as part of the Biden administration as its possible to be. 

Actually, no. The opposite, in fact. There are several protections at play regarding the DOJ to insulate it from the White House. As I said, it’s not total, but it’s stronger than in other departments. This became particularly important in the wake of Watergate.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.21  Sean Treacy  replied to  evilone @2.4.17    one month ago
e is so feeble and senile as to not be able to function day-to-day WH functions, but he can micromanage the DoJ? I truly don't understand the logic of these people.

Do you think he can't say yes or no? Biden had no problem  making the call on searching Mar-a-Lago. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.22  Sean Treacy  replied to  Tacos! @2.4.20    one month ago
The opposite, in fact

No. The opposite would be if the DOJ were not a part of the executive branch. It's an executive agency and the President controls all executive agencies. It's "independence" is demonstrated by Obama using the office to his self described wingman there to best  protect him.

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
2.4.23  evilone  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.4.21    one month ago
Do you think he can't say yes or no? 

Unless you have something with him saying yes, or no, you have nothing but conjecture. 

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
2.4.24  evilone  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.4.21    one month ago
Biden had no problem  making the call on searching Mar-a-Lago. 

Biden got a memo. He probably got a memo on this too, but that doesn't mean he micromanages the DoJ.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.25  Tessylo  replied to  evilone @2.4.18    one month ago

Thank you for pointing out the facts.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.4.26  Sean Treacy  replied to  evilone @2.4.23    one month ago

He's the chief executive officer. His job is to oversee the executive branch.  It's amazing how nothing the executive branch does, is apparently his responsibility. So much for the buck stops with him.  With Biden and Harris, it's point the fingers and claim and blame others. 

It's such a laughable, desperate ploy to pretend the President has no control over the agencies he oversees. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.4.27  devangelical  replied to  evilone @2.4.17    one month ago
the Justice Department operates pretty independently from the president

unless trump is in office ...

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Participates
3  Greg Jones    one month ago

Well, it these purges can somehow be construed to be election interference, what should we called Jack Smith's belated new charges against Trump?

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
3.1  bugsy  replied to  Greg Jones @3    one month ago
what should we called Jack Smith's belated new charges against Trump?

Desperation that many in the current DOJ will lose their jobs in January.

 
 
 
Hallux
Professor Principal
3.2  seeder  Hallux  replied to  Greg Jones @3    one month ago
what should we called Jack Smith's belated new charges against Trump?

Anna works for me, you?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
3.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  Hallux @3.2    one month ago

I was thinking Claire Ificashun.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.2.2  devangelical  replied to  Split Personality @3.2.1    one month ago

ugh ...

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
3.3  Tacos!  replied to  Greg Jones @3    one month ago

You’re free to explain how any charges - old, new, or refiled - actually interfere with the election.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.3.1  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @3.3    one month ago

For a 'campaign' that's been going for four years now.  Ever since 1/6, so not quite........

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Guide
3.3.2  Tacos!  replied to  Tessylo @3.3.1    one month ago

Yeah, and something like 300 thousand people voted early in Georgia on Tuesday. That’s a record. It sure as hell isn’t “interfering” with anything there.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.3.3  Tessylo  replied to  Tacos! @3.3.2    one month ago

I heard that also.  Freaking awesome.  

I'm going to be an election judge for early voting on two days and on Election Day.

I'm excited.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.3.4  devangelical  replied to  Tessylo @3.3.3    one month ago

don't forget to notify the authorities when some maga moron shows up wearing trump paraphernalia ...

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
3.4  evilone  replied to  Greg Jones @3    one month ago
what should we called Jack Smith's belated new charges against Trump?

They are not new charges. It is a refiling after the SCOTUS ruled that some actions couldn't be tried, so they dropped charges that applied to that ruling. 

Late Edit: It's not even a refiling - Smith submitted a brief on which charges he wants to retain - the judge was tasked with going through the original charges and tossing those she doesn't think apply per the new SCOTUS ruling. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.5  devangelical  replied to  Greg Jones @3    one month ago
what should we called Jack Smith's belated new charges against Trump?

like superseding indictments, a legitimate legal effort, just like all of trumps judicial stalling attempts ...

 
 

Who is online



160 visitors