Connect with us

Politics

Supreme Court grants Virginia’s appeal to purge voter rolls ahead of Election Day

Published

on

Supreme Court grants Virginia’s appeal to purge voter rolls ahead of Election Day

The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted Virginia’s emergency request to revive Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s systematic purge of voter rolls ahead of Election Day.

The court’s three Democratic appointees dissented from the order. The Republican-appointed majority didn’t explain its reasoning, nor did the dissenters, which isn’t unusual in emergency litigation.

The Republican win from the Roberts Court follows Tuesday’s nearly unanimous rejection of former independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s attempt to get off ballots in battleground states Wisconsin and Michigan, which he wanted to do to help Republican Donald Trump’s campaign.

The justices are also expected to rule soon on an emergency bid from Republicans to block provisional ballots in Pennsylvania. The impending decision in the case from that swing state could provide a fuller picture of how the court is handling litigation in this election, which could be a close one between Trump and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris.

A federal judge on Friday had blocked Virginia’s program, citing the National Voter Registration Act. That federal law bars states from systematically removing ineligible voters within 90 days of a federal election. Virginia argued to the justices that the law doesn’t apply to removing noncitizens and that its removal process is individualized, not systematic.

Opposing the emergency bid alongside voting rights groups, the federal government said that Virginia has “no legitimate interest in continuing practices that plainly violated federal law.” The government said that state officials “pervasively invoke alleged harms that they have failed to prove. … Notably, applicants have provided no reason to believe that any noncitizens have voted in past Virginia elections, or that any are likely to do so in the upcoming election.”

In ruling against the state, U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles said that its program has curtailed the rights of eligible voters to cast their ballots, citing evidence that eligible citizens have had their registrations canceled. The Joe Biden appointee said that “restoring the right to vote of all eligible voters affected by this program strongly outweighs the burden to Defendants [Virginia] of restoring those names to the rolls.”

She added that officials could still remove ineligible registrants through individualized inquiry.

On Sunday, a 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel said it was likewise “unpersuaded” by the state’s argument that it wasn’t violating the federal voter registration law. “Here, the challenged program does not require communication with or particularized investigation into any specific individual,” a unanimous appeals court panel said in the order that prompted Supreme Court review. “Rather, the inclusion of a person’s name on a list electronically compared to other agency databases is enough for removal from the voter rolls.”

The panel of Democratic appointees said the state’s argument that the law doesn’t cover noncitizens “violates basic principles of statutory construction by focusing on a differently worded statutory provision that is not at issue here and proposing a strained reading of the Quiet Period Provision to avoid rendering that other provision absurd or unconstitutional. That is not how courts interpret statutes.”

The Supreme Court’s order on Wednesday pauses the trial judge’s ruling pending further litigation in the appeals court and potentially the high court.

In the 2020 election that Trump lost to Biden, the Democrat won Virginia, where early voting is already underway this year, by about half a million votes.

While this appeal only concerned Virginia, the state was backed at the high court by Republican interests and states, including a brief led by Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach, who was previously held in contempt and sanctioned for defying court orders during voting litigation.  

Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in Donald Trump’s legal cases.

Jordan Rubin

Jordan Rubin is the Deadline: Legal Blog writer. He was a prosecutor for the New York County District Attorney’s Office in Manhattan and is the author of “Bizarro,” a book about the secret war on synthetic drugs. Before he joined BLN, he was a legal reporter for Bloomberg Law.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

Andy Beshear hits Newsom for hosting Bannon on his new podcast

Published

on

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear took a swipe Thursday at a fellow leading Democrat, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, for hosting one of the most prominent figures in the MAGA movement on his new podcast.

Beshear, whose popularity in a heavily Republican state has turned him into a potential presidential candidate, told reporters that Newsom shouldn’t have opened his platform to Steve Bannon, an outspoken advocate of the “America first” agenda of President Donald Trump.

“I think that Governor Newsom bringing on different voices is great, we shouldn’t be afraid to talk and to debate just about anyone,” Beshear said at a Democratic policy retreat in Virginia. “But Steve Bannon espouses hatred and anger, and even at some points violence, and I don’t think we should give him oxygen on any platform, ever, anywhere.”

The criticism of Newsom, who is widely expected to run for president, amounted to what could be an early skirmish in the next Democratic primary. It also reflects divisions within a party trying to find its footing after Trump’s resounding victory.

The California governor recently launched the podcast, which appears to some degree to be an effort to find common ground with an ascendant conservative movement.

In his debut episode, speaking to Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA, Newsom drew widespread attention — and criticism — for suggesting that Democrats were wrong to allow transgender athletes to participate in female youth sports. He was also critical of progressives who have called for defunding the police or who use the gender neutral term “Latinx.”

Newsom defended his approach and the Bannon interview in an email statement on Wednesday, saying it is “critically important” to understand Trump’s movement and how it successfully operated in the last campaign.

In the hour-long episode, Bannon repeated the debunked claims that the 2020 election was stolen amid a discussion that also covered tariffs and taxes.

“I think we all agreed after the last election that it’s important for Democrats to explore new and unique ways of talking to people,” Newsom said.

A spokesperson for Newsom, who plans to have Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz on his next episode, did not immediately respond to a request for comment about Beshear’s remarks.

The Kentucky governor, who was a featured speaker at the retreat along with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, was not alone in criticizing the Bannon interview.

Former Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who was one of the few Republicans in Congress to challenge Trump, called it an “insane” decision to host Bannon.

“I am in shock at the stupidity of [Newsom] inviting Steve Bannon on his podcast,” Kinzinger said Wednesday. “Many of us on the right sacrificed careers to fight Bannon, and Newsom is trying to make a career and a presidential run by building him up.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Top Illinois Democrat readies a Senate bid — and tells people she has major backing

Published

on

Ambitious Illinois Democrats are dreaming about Sen. Dick Durbin’s exit in 2026. The latest contender: the state’s lieutenant governor.

Juliana Stratton, who first took office in 2019, is quietly positioning herself for a Senate bid if Durbin bows out, calling key Democratic figures to ask for support, according to three people with knowledge of her plans, one of whom spoke with her directly and the other two who spoke with members of her team.

And she and her staff have said that she’s already secured the support of Gov. JB Pritzker, the three people said. They were granted anonymity to discuss private conversations and avoid political retribution. She and her team have made clear she expects Pritzker to be heavily involved financially, those people said.

“Juliana continues to keep an open mind about future opportunities, and if she does decide to pursue higher office, she’d be proud to earn the governor’s support while working to build a broad grassroots coalition,” said a spokesperson for the lieutenant governor, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations.

Pritzker, a high-profile governor and potential 2028 hopeful, is already a prolific Democratic donor and party operator, and his vast personal wealth would be a significant boost to any candidate. His money and endorsement could transform the brewing shadow primary that includes several members of the state’s congressional delegation.

His team declined to discuss an endorsement or financial backing in any potential primary. “We’re not going to engage with hypotheticals for a seat that’s not even open,” said a person close to the governor’s political operation granted anonymity to speak candidly.

The governor hand-picked Stratton, then a state representative, to be his running mate in 2017 and he was a guest of honor last month at a fundraising event for her newly formed federal PAC.

Illinois Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton speaks to reporters as Gov. JB Pritzker, to her left, looks on with other state lawmakers in Chicago on Feb. 10, 2025.

Pritzker, a billionaire heir to the Hyatt hotel empire, could support that PAC as well as donate millions to any other super PACs supporting her campaign. That kind of financial support could make Stratton the front-runner in a primary that would essentially guarantee a spot in the Senate in the heavily blue state.

And if a Pritzker-backed candidate wins the race, it could help position him even more firmly as a major Democratic powerbroker, one whose influence could extend beyond Illinois political circles as 2028 approaches.

Durbin has served in the Senate since 1997 and while many Democrats expect the 80-year-old will retire, those close to him say he hasn’t yet decided.

In a brief interview Wednesday, Durbin acknowledged the lieutenant governor was among the Democrats who are preparing for his possible retirement: “She said if I run she’s not going to.”

Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi has been padding his campaign account for years for a possible Senate run. He had amassed $17.1 million by the end of 2024. His fellow Democratic Reps. Lauren Underwood, who flipped a GOP-held district in 2018, and Robin Kelly, the former chair of the Illinois Democratic Party, are also eyeing the seat.

And Illinois Democrats have made a parlor game of wondering what’s next for Rahm Emanuel, the former Chicago mayor who just returned from an ambassador stint in Japan. For now, he’s a commentator on BLN.

Continue Reading

Politics

‘Be careful about this’: Warnings abound as GOP considers writing off tax cuts

Published

on

‘Be careful about this’: Warnings abound as GOP considers writing off tax cuts

Republicans will discuss the accounting maneuver with President Donald Trump on Thursday…
Read More

Continue Reading

Trending