A federal judge denied a request by the Ohio Democratic Party to block a voter purge the state plans to implement this Friday.
The judge, U.S. District Judge James Graham, said Tuesday that the Democrats had failed to provide sufficient evidence that thousands of eligible Ohio voters stand to be improperly removed from the rolls. He also said those Ohioans can either re-register by next month and still vote in the coming elections, or vote provisionally, as election officials have been instructed to count the ballots of certain voters who were removed in recent purges.
The lawsuit was the latest volley in a years-long war over Ohio’s system of beginning its purge process merely because a voter did not participate in a certain time period of elections. Under the regime, registrants who don’t vote within two years of elections are sent a mailer notifying them they could be removed from the rolls. If they don’t respond to the mailer or engage in voter activity — which also includes signing a petition or updating registration information — within the following four years, they are removed.
The purge scheduled for Friday will be the second round of removals since the Supreme Court okayed last year Ohio’s use of voter inactivity to trigger this process. But scrutiny of it has continued, particularly after the new GOP secretary of state released the list of voters planned for removals in the coming purge as part of one last round of outreach efforts. Voting rights groups and media outlets say they have found thousands of registrants who are still eligible to vote in the state and thus shouldn’t be purged.
They have asked the secretary of state, Frank LaRose (pictured above) to pause the purge so more vetting and outreach can be done based on the list.
LaRose’s office has claimed he is obligated by state law to continue the purge process his predecessor started.
“We’ll continue our work to carry out the law and our mission to run accessible, secure and accurate elections,” his spokesperson said in a statement after the judge’s order came down Tuesday.
Some 235,000 voters were on the purge list LaRose released, but at least 10,000 of them have reactivated their registrations and thus will not be removed on Friday. The purge list also includes voters being removed based on change-of-address records, in addition to those removed for inactivity.
The Democrats’ lawsuit, filed on Friday, was separate from the longstanding case in which a settlement was reached earlier this week. That settlement had to do with allegations that the notices the state sent for to-be-purged voters did not comply with the National Voter Registration Act.
Quelle surprise.
There are Judges, then there are partisan political hacks appointed by Republicans.
fighting is but only one way to address these issues
want them to knock this shit off? Then use their tactics against them.
sue to purge every geriatric from Ohio’s red districts that you can find, there are whole VA hospitals that can be disenfranchised by something like this, I know, I did the census in them in 2010
none of this is nice and not advocating for it, but their side does not play nice, and nice is getting this side second place all of the time
I know that every single trick Rs play with voting has always got the house edge built in for them. Any hurdles to voting, any friction you can cause is supposed to hurt liberals.
But as long as this was strictly, fairly enforced and applied absolutely equally to both parties…does it hurt liberals more? Could it backfire and blow up if we see a 10 year run of fervent Dem GOTV? I am always stunned that the laziest, stoopidest, least civically minded and intransigent assholes (Rs) get out to vote like crazed demons. Really? Actually making them work for it…voter IDs and skipping elections penalties and having to re-register isn’t going to swell their ranks.
Though these Voter ID laws often “Grandfather” in statistically conservative voters by including forms of ID that older, whiter voters are more likely to already possess, while disallowing equivalent IDs that younger, less white voters may possess.