Are you saying he shouldn't have been prosecuted for that?
The over 2 centuries of precedent was the peaceful transfer of power in case there is any doubt, in case you may have forgotten.
Supreme Court allows Virginia effort to strike possible noncitizen voters
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
The over 2 centuries of precedent was the peaceful transfer of power in case there is any doubt, in case you may have forgotten.
My understanding is states are supposedly forbidden from doing this within 90 days of an election. Which makes sense.
To begin with, as I stated repeatedly "back in the day," I am not of the view that there is such a thing as absolute executive immunity, and indeed, that was very much an issue the Revolution was fought over. But - as the Court recognized in the decision, the real question is not one of absolute immunity but one of scope, and here the court limited presumptive immunity to his official acts. Quibble with that if you must, but it is by no means a crazy idea.
As to the "precedent" point, ok fine, but when you make a post in a thread discussing judicial decision, usually the term 'precedent' is read to mean judicial precedents, and particularly when coupled with the phrase "overturning." It is not usually interpreted to mean some unreferenced disruption to some non-judicial historical continuity.
I was quoting what the OP article said:
Youngkin signed an order in August to expedite the removal of registered voters whose driver’s license applications indicated or suggested that they were not U.S. citizens.
They have been doing this systematically for years.
VA, and other states, have asked the Feds for help in determining citizenship, and the feds have been slow or not responded to requests for help.
Shouldn't you become better informed?
Do you always rely on poorly done and partisan articles for your information? Somehow or another I happened to know more about this than the OP's source without having to do much research at all.
So my question for the conservatives on the board is this. How is this not legislating from the bench? The law specifically says you can’t do a systemic voter purge within 90 days of an election. There is a valid legislative purpose for that law. You want to give someone time to respond. You can go through the rolls and
Remove them in an individual case
By case but not systemically.
isn’t this something the judicial branch does that you frequently complain about? This is not an interpretation of the law. What Virginia did was clearly a violation of the law
Remove them in an individual case
By case but not systemically.
isn’t this something the judicial branch does that you frequently complain about? This is not an interpretation of the law. What Virginia did was clearly a violation of the law
The Washington Post is a respected news source. I'm sure you on the other hand research every post you compose.
VA could have simply gone with the initial Federal court rulings, and flagged those voters to see if they actually voted. They could have then charged every illegal voter with a felony. All those who think the SCOTUS decision was wrong please tell us if you would have preferred that solution. That, of course, would have still allowed votes to be cast illegally, and could sway any number of local, state, and national elections.
There's also a law, plus the Constitution, that says non-citizens aren't allowed to vote. SCOTUS didn't write the Constitution (or Amendments), or the Federal law. They are enforcing existing law, and the very law cited by Dems when they voted against Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. Dems can't have it both ways.
...and, the law invoked by the Feds here actual references the 'eligibility' concept in its text, which obviously leaves room for judicial interpretation.
So, while we shouldn't all get too worked up about emergency stay decisions that say precisely zero about the merits we're all conjecturing on, that is how, to the questioner's point, this is not "legislating from the bench". Viewed in at least one easily plausible light, it's precisely the opposite of legislating in that it is a very ordinary course exercise of the quintessentially judicial function.
Are you attempting to question the validity of our democratic institutions? Sure seems like it. Fascist.
Virginia's process is being done on a case by case basis,..It's not systemic, and not a violation of the law, as written.
Yes, I would have preferred that solution. The issue isn't the removal of non-citizens from the registration rolls - it's the actual citizens who are being removed due to a weak process, and the fact that it is happening so close to the election, making it difficult for people wrongly removed to correct the error.
These are people who just missed a box on a form; not people who are likely non-citizens. It seems likely many - perhaps most - of the people who failed to check the box are actually citizens.
Non sequitur. Not that you don't already understand this; but nobody here has suggested ineligible people should not be removed from registration rolls. We are saying eligible people should not be removed.
Why does the right want to remove eligible voters from registration rolls? See how stupid that sounds? Well, that's how stupid you sound to us.
Good grief, you truly are an idiot. Do you think this ruling suddenly made it illegal for non-citizens to vote? But what you really want is to prevent fully qualified citizens from voting since suppression is the only way maggots win.
No worries, Bins, it's other people being impinged upon. You'll be fine. It isn't like the SCOTUS did something cray cray like carve out a position of absolute immunity for the president.
I get why the Trump humpers are applauding this decision. What is still puzzling to me is the laughably naive posters in this thread who do not see this move by Virginia as part of the nationwide effort to cut participation in order to service the ego of a 78 year old loser who can't stand the beating his ego took because of 2020. Drive down participation. Drive up the belief that the system is rigged / corrupt. This action by Virginia is literally being repeated all over the country in slightly different forms.
I assume these naive posters will be here pissing and moaning about why the Dems nominated someone so unqualified if Trump wins.
I assume these naive posters will be here pissing and moaning about why the Dems nominated someone so unqualified if Trump wins.
If you’re not a citizen, it shouldn’t matter if it sim minutes before the election.
Guess we will see how many eligible voters were removed wont we? My guess is zero.
Well some have already come forward. So your guess is wrong. How many people do you think might miss the checkbox on their drivers license registration? If it's only one in a hundred, that's a bunch of people. Because some of already mentioned that they had filled-the form out multiple times in the past; and it just takes missing the box once to give you the boot.
At the very least, couldn't you at least admit it's a terrible method, destined to affect a lot of eligible votes, and unwise to be doing in the weeks before an election? Even if you refuse to admit bad motives, can't you least admit incompetence?
Paul Pate has been the Secretary of State for several years. He is the man in charge of running elections, yet, he somehow just discovered we might have some fake voters here in Iowa to hunt down. FRAUD IS EVERYWHERE!!!
https://www.kcrg.com/2024/10/30/day...wn-challenging-2000-iowa-voter-registrations/
https://www.kcrg.com/2024/10/30/day...wn-challenging-2000-iowa-voter-registrations/
Sure. Incompetence. Ok.
The voters that are removed are notified. The have a chance to correct the removal if it is in error. They can cast a provisional ballot and if the removal was in appropriate the ballot is counted. I don't think anyone is disenfranchised here.
Here we are with an action in Iowa. The SoS is a Republican, who has spent the last several years stating that our elections have been free of any fraud, including the infamous 1st District race in which non resident of the district MMM, defeated Christina Bohannan by 6 votes. His push to challenge voters eligibility is the same one we see echoed across the country. No real proof, and backed by 24 years of record keeping which is surely not up to date. The clear reason for this move is suppress the vote of naturalized citizens. One county auditor is fighting back.
I suspect in a state like VA the number of naturalized citizens is much higher, and therefore much more important to the GQP to suppress their votes.
https://www.kcrg.com/2024/11/01/cou...-iowa-secretary-state-order-voter-challenges/
