Is there any recourse to a SCOTUS ruling? They just ruled 6-3 to allow VA to purge voter rolls within 1 WEEK of an

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

election.

SCOTUS is corrupt! There MUST be something that can be done…

Are corrupt Supreme Court Justices simply to be allowed to hand Donald Trump, another corrupt and worse person) the United States presidency?

If the Justices have allowed something so fundamental as purging voter rolls within a week of the election when there are laws that purging will not be done inside of 90 days of an election.

So…please…tell.…me. What should be done?

TFG is out there crying “PA is cheating”. What a joke, THEY are the ones who were cheating by flooding PA with 2500 voter registrations that are suspicious — some might be fraudulent, but some might be legit. PA is checking them out. Doing what they are supposed to do.

Who else is sick and tired of TFG, will we never be done with him.

[JohnSJ]

1. The recourse is for those voters who have been purged to re-register ASAP

[Emile]

2. You mean there is still time to do that,?

[Tweedy]

51. They can bring their id documents and

re-register on Election Day. Then, they can cast a provisional ballot.

This decision stinks to high heaven. The Supreme Court is nullifying Congress’ law regarding voter purges ninety days before an election.

[Silent Type]

8. +1. And, they can reregister at polls. Not perfect, but probably only remedy they'll have

assuming any purged actually show up at polls and can show evidence of citizenship.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

9. What about if other states try to do the same and voter registration is closed for this election?

Some claim that because of this SCOTUS ruling other states will do the same assuming SCOTUS will permit it.

Also, this ruling is an ominous prediction that SCOTUS would potentially rule in TFGs favor when he sues because of non existent voter fraud. When dealing with a corrupt court, what then?

[Igel]

35. A few things.

1. Virginia's following a law that's been around for a while, used by (D) and (R) governors--it's not a new whimsical thing.

2. This "program" just runs through people that said they weren't citizens and who registered. Perhaps they indicated that by accident; still, they said they weren't eligible to vote then registered. If it's by accident, they had a chance to correct the error. It's not a wholesale purge based on last names, but on self-reporting.

3. The specificity and case-by-case nature opens the door to questioning whether this qualifies as a "program," as alleged in the plaintiff's case against Virginia. Note that this claim has *not* been adjudicated and is still an allegation that awaits a trial court to so much as hear evidence. Hence the "scare quotes" in (2). If you only hear one side of the issue you've only heard one side of the issue and it seems convincing; that's usually the case, esp. if you're not given the text of the statute involved and the details of what was done.

I like a quote from a sci-fi show: “Understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth.” That's the court system as intended: there's the plaintiff, the defendant, and from that thesis and antithesis presumably a judge and/or jury can sort out the truth. (This is the Anglo-Saxon way; most of Europe follows Roman law, where the judge is really in charge ... The Roman legal system as reflected in Europe is really much more like the Russian legal system than the Anglo-American one.)

[Tickle]

60. Yep good job NT

[Attilatheblond]

27. might be an option in states with same day registration/voting, but too late to register in most states

The Roberts Partisan Court is part of the orchestrated octopus of strangling voting.

[Igel]

29. The voters that were purged were contacted (at their recent DMV-reported addresses)

and given the chance to set the record straight.

They can also register up to and including election day. This applies primarily to those who were officially purged 90 days before election day--one day earlier and there'd have been no federal statute saying no.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

34. Thanks for the clarification. I'm glad to know that other states won't be able to use this ruling as justification for

doing the same in their states!

Thanks again.

[soandso]

61. The question is citizenship

If they aren't citizens, they can't re-register.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/10/supreme-court-allows-virginia-to-remove-suspected-non-citizens-from-voter-rolls/

[JohnSJ]

62. No it isn't. Younkin or the SC doesn't know if they are citizens, and there ARE citizens in that group that have been

purged.

https://www.npr.org/2024/10/29/nx-s1-5169204/virginia-noncitizen-voter-purge

The state officials are suppossed to verify that a person who registers to vote meets the requirements.

My understanding is that is not how younkin decided to purge those voters.

[soandso]

69. Thanks for the link

And I did hear this report on NPR which sounded a tad complicated in that some may have been wrongly removed but not all. It does say they can register until election day, though, so they should be able to provide their proof of citizenship by then.

Their DMV system sounds screwed up and needs to be fixed. This stood out:

Carolina Diaz Tavera, a naturalized U.S. citizen whose voter registration was canceled but who does not appear on the list of voters removed after Aug. 7, filed a declaration in the lawsuit saying she is concerned the state removed her from the voter rolls due to outdated DMV records since she was a legal resident when she got her driver's license.

So that sounds like she was not a citizen when she got her license which led to the problem with her. The others sound like it was the format of the form, itself. Fix it!

I think the voter registration systems in all states need to be reworked so this can't happen anymore and voter registration should be tied to birth certificates or naturalization, somehow. It can't be that hard.

[JohnSJ]

71. It is complicated and confusing. Regardless, I don't think this will change the election results in Virginia, but

it may mean republicans will push the same agenda in other states.

[soandso]

72. All the more reason it needs to be addressed

Maybe a task force with a couple of people from each state and territory. It needs to be clear, not fuzzy. It really mucks things up when some cities allow non citizens to vote in elections. Do they have some special voter registrations that specifies what elections they can legally vote and which they cannot? Anyway, developing a standardized, streamlined and accurate method doesn't seem hard.

[JohnSJ]

73. Yes

[Kid Berwyn]

3. President BIden can, officially, arrest and detain the traitorous SCrOTUS 6.

He can lock them up at the Motel 6 Washington DC.

What happens when they can't get back to work, they get fired like anybody else.

And, per the legal eagle-eye John Roberts, it's completely legal.

[birdographer]

13. I'd like to think that if it came down to it

Biden would use his shiny new immunity to take some action. I know he disagrees wholeheartedly to the whole immunity ruling, and he wants his entire term to be clean, but he cannot let them get away with putting their Nazi in the WH through cheating and favors from the bought-and-paid-for SCOTUS.

[onenote]

18. Of course he can't. That's not what the immunity decision means.

I suppose he could order them arrested and he would be immune from criminal prosecution for doing so. But he can't prevent the courts from ordering them released, which would happen in a nano second.

Moreover, do you really think Biden ordering members of the supreme court locked up the week before election day is a good idea or something a rational president would consider?

[MayReasonRule]

24. I Have No Doubt He'll Make A Prudent Choice

Here's to Kamala's election!!!

[Kid Berwyn]

25. Not now, after November 7.

I think President Biden should give the GOP a taste of their own medicine should Trump, Cruz, Johnson and the rest of the GOP complain or riot or celebrate with in insurrection over the loss. You know, like they do every election.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

36. Definitely not before the election... perfect timing would be once TFGs legal team appeals to the Supreme Court.

Then lock them up and the 3 honest justices can rule appropriately. Corrupt justices deserve to be judged for their deceit in a proper court of law.

[onenote]

54. No and No.

First, under federal law, the Supreme Court requires a quorum of six justices to act. See 28 USC Sec. 1: "§1. Number of justices; quorum
The Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, any six of whom shall constitute a quorum."

Second, any order to arrest the justices would be blocked by the courts and refused to be carried out by law enforcement.

Silly pipe dreams.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

56. Way to kill my dreams! nt

[msfiddlestix]

74. Well, I dunno. Apparently this SCOTUS pretty much says a President has immunity for anything while in office.

[onenote]

76. It's been explained here dozens of time. He has immunity from criminal prosecution.

It doesn't mean that his orders have to be followed by law enforcement or can't be blocked or reversed by the courts.

[struggle4progress]

4. We'll have an intelligent principled response when there's time

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

16. What? There's nothing intelligent and no principles involved in this at all

[orthoclad]

78. Around the same time the plotters of J6 get charged?

[misanthrope]

5. The very dumbest thing about this contention of illegals voting

Let's say you're in the U.S. illegally. Are you going to head to a polling place to identify yourself using a state-issued ID and mailing address in an action that is likely to end up with you being detained and eventually deported? No, you aren't. You will continue to keep your head down and nose to the grindstone to take advantage of the relative safety and better earnings that drew you to the nation in the first place.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

11. So very true. The republicons are just using it as an excuse to PURGE people from voting so TFG can try to steal

another election. This time perhaps successfully with the help of a corrupt SCOTUS.

[MayReasonRule]

6. There Is An Unreasoned Shadow Docket As Well...

The district and circuit courts gave extensive reasoning behind their opinions. It's a farce that SCOTUS doesn't even have to issue a justification for overturning those beyond, "Trust us, bro."

Fascist bullshit through and through.

What if the Executive fell back on "Roberts made his (unreasoned, unsigned) decision, now let him enforce it."

The Executive would not be wrong in taking that position.

Though the Court didn’t announce how every justice voted in Beals v. Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights, only its three Democrats publicly dissented.

Wouldn't the Court be surprised if the DOJ had them arrested via an Executive Order.

Yes, yes they would...

I'm not sure what prudence says...
I'm struggling with that right now...



https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/103024zr_f2ah.pdf

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

17. Has prudence spoken yet? For me, yes it has. I personally hope that after the election has been called for Harris/Walz

that they are indeed arrested for fraud or treason or whatever DOJ deems appropriate for corrupt Supreme Court Justices. Then when TFGs case gets to SCOTUS the 3 honest justices can rule appropriately!

[MayReasonRule]

26. That's A Tall Order...

Time will tell what Kamala does...
Time will give us 20/20 vision as well as hindsight appears...

I'm unable to say what prudence truly dictates.

Over half of the country is ruled by Y'all Qaeda fascist thugs...

I'm living in that half...

Jeff Mother Fucking Landry is the "Dear Leader' of my fascist state.
I'm surrounded on all sides by fascists of all stripes and idiots asunder...

For fucks sake.

Here's to Kamala making the best choices...
Here's to the dissolution of the GOP and Reason's rule...

[Attilatheblond]

28. Give DEMs an overwhelming majority on the Hill and Harris as POTUS

Then impeach the traitorous SOBs of the corrupt Roberts Court.

[onenote]

19. The problem is that Virginia officials wanted this result, so who is going to "enforce" something against them?

And as explained above, the immunity decision would prevent Biden from being prosecuted for ordering the justices arrested, it wouldn't stop the courts from ordering their immediate release nor would it necessarily result in law enforcement officials obeying what they might well perceive as an unlawful order.

[MayReasonRule]

21. Including That Consideration Along With All The Rest I'm Still Not Certain What Prudence Dictates

[DSandra]

7. post deleted

[DSandra]

10. Apparently TFG wants to continually punish us for putting a black man in the White House n/t

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

15. Yup... racist prick that he is!

[pat_k]

12. Worse than corrupt. Traitors.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

14. Yes! Traitors to the US Constitution. Doesn't that make them guilty of treason.

Garland can arrest them for treason. If not that, Garland should surely do something. How the hell can the court rule AGAINST a law that has been in effect for years? It’s total INSANITY!

[onenote]

22. No it's not treason as defined in the Constitution. It is, imo, a gross misinterpretation and misapplication of a federa

It is, imo, a gross misinterpretation and misapplication of a federal statute. But like it or not, a bedrock constitutional principle, established in Marbury v Madison in 1803 is that "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

[Ilikepurple]

32. More like a bedrock judicial principle

I’m not disagreeing with Marbury v Madison and think it will hold for the reasonable future, but it’s still just a set of USSC holdings that can be overturned or someday challenged by one of the other two branches of government. I admit that this is most likely the province of political fanfiction, but I shiver when people talk of many constitutional rights and principles as if they are written in stone. I do agree that if any court created ones are, it’s this one though.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

40. Roe v Wade was overturned -- never before had a Supreme Court ruling ever been overturned. Doesn't seem like

anything is sacred anymore.

[sarisataka]

43. Never? It behooves one to do a bit of research

List of overruled United States Supreme Court decisions

[Ontheboundry]

50. Thank you

I almost fell over when I read that.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

59. Hmmm, thought I remembered hearing it hadn't happened before. You are very right, I should have checked first.

I’m humbled 😊

[pat_k]

67. None Dare Call It Treason

Just because they wear black robes doesn't me they can't be traitors.

Abuse of power for the purpose of undermining the constitution or stealing an election is, for all intents and purposes, treason.

As it was when the five black-robbed traitors handed down the decision in Bush v. Gore.

None Dare Call It Treason
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/none-dare-call-it-treason/

The Betrayal of America
May 4, 2001
by Vincent Bugliosi

[pat_k]

66. None Dare Call It Treason

"gross misinterpretation and misapplication of a federal statute" for the purpose of stealing an election or otherwise undermining the constitution is, for all intents and purposes, treason.

As it was when the five black-robbed traitors handed down the decision in Bush v. Gore.

None Dare Call It Treason
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/none-dare-call-it-treason/

The Betrayal of America
May 4, 2001
by Vincent Bugliosi

[DeepWinter]

20. I have no problem with voter purge

People die, people move. But it needs to be done at least 6 months or so prior to an election. Time enough to correct errors.

[onenote]

23. Even the federal statute at issue allows the removal of dead voters from the rolls any time prior to the election

Of course, that isn't the issue in this case.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

41. Precisely. I wouldn't object to voters who had died being removed either.

[joshcryer]

30. The only dead people voting are GOPers...

...putting grandpappy's ballot in the mail.

And they are all caught. Because they always check if a voter voted after they died. Will they do anything to his son Bobby Shitforbrains for mailing it? Probably fucking not. But they'll look in to it for sure and send people knocking on his door. He will just deny doing it and shrug it off and because nobody can prove he did it intentionally he'll walk.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

44. A woman in Minnesota filled out and sent in a vote for her mother who died before the vote being cast. She

admitted it; she even forged her mothers signature. Proof she is low-IQ.

https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/woman-forged-dead-moms-signature-ballot-charges/

[pat_k]

68. When they purge multiple voters with the same name as a single dead voter. . .

. . .that is not "cleaning up registration lists," that is knowingly, and unlawfully depriving citizens of the right to vote.

When, based on bad information, they purge naturalized citizens, that is not "cleaning up registration lists," that is unlawfully depriving citizens of their right to vote.

When they intentionally target ethnic surnames, that is not "cleaning up registration lists." That is violating the equal protection to deny lawful voters the right to vote.

And when you do it based on bullshit challenges targeting geographically democratic areas from a handful of people based on crap data, the only intent, and effect, is to suppress democratic votes.

[SharonClark]

31. Isn't one recourse that the purged voters

can register at the polls on Election Day?

[mjvpi]

33. A Big Blue Wave. Then expand the Supreme Court. Not short term, but that's the Fix.

[orthoclad]

37. Expand the Court, impeach the corrupt, charge the T3 with perjury

for lying to the Senate.

No easy fix. If we don't address the Extreme Court they will keep biting us.

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

46. T3 ?

Perjury won’t work; they’ll claim they changed their minds.

[orthoclad]

77. The Trump 3

Charge them and make them deny it. Get it in the news.

We shouldn't self-censor efforts. The Right doesn't/

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

48. Alito & Thomas could probably be impeached due to accepting bribes (gifts, trips, etc.)

[orthoclad]

79. And have the FBI do a REAL investigation of Kavanaugh's background

You know, the one Trump told them to skimp.
Maybe he didn't need to tell them, wink wink.

[SomedayKindaLove]

38. Is there any legal recourse if someone is

Erroneously/incorrectly purged and denied their right to vote?

[Skittles]

39. this is a result of the Electoral College

look how many justices were appointed by nitwits who didn't even win the popular vote

[bluestarone]

42. So, if a large number of these so called non-citizens lose the right to vote

Wouldn't they have a right to sue the ones that ordered their removal? (If in fact they were CITIZENS)

[onenote]

58. Probably not. Might depend on the circumstances.

For example, it appears that some of those purged from the rolls failed to check a box indicating their citizenship. If that's why they were purged despite being a citizen, I don't see how they could sue.

[sarisataka]

45. After reading this thread

I believe our schools need to improve upon teaching how the US government works

SMH

[Jmb 4 Harris-Walz]

47. Please... don't just shake your head, educate us.

[sarisataka]

49. A quick 3 things

-SCOTUS is the final appeal of a law, no other court may overturn their ruling, except another SCOTUS decision.

-the President may not arbitrarily have SCOTUS justices arrested

-treason is defined in the Constitution, is does not include "SCOTUS rulings that are unpopular"

[AkFemDem]

52. Needs to be dealt with but likely many of the 1600 purged....

Already voted anyway, because VA early voting has been going on for weeks so theres that anyway.

[totodeinhere]

53. The only recourse would be for SCOTUS to reverse their decision.

Reversals do happen. But don't hold your breath.

[WarGamer]

55. if you read the "more informed" posts below you'll understand better.

[ecstatic]

57. they lost all legitimacy years ago, but we will prevail. VA has election day registration

I checked.

MAGAts are disgusting. We will put them back in their effing places come January.

Registration deadlines
In person during early voting : Sep 20 - Nov 2
In-person at voting location on Election Day : Nov 5
Online : Oct 15 by 11:59 p.m. EDT
By mail (postmarked by) : Oct 15

[Baitball Blogger]

63. All Supreme Court decisions can be overturned if you have a reasonable, legal challenge.

It won't be hard to prove that this Supreme Court was politically motivating and their reasoning failed the expectation of precedent.

[JohnSJ]

64. not easily with the makeup of this SC. They will never overturn one of THEIR decisions.

[Baitball Blogger]

65. Of course. That goes without saying.

[Tarc]

70. Either the SC reverses itself, or a constitutional amendment is passed

The only two avenues.

[wiggs]

75. How about suing for damages if denied a vote irresponsibly? Scotus OK with purging those ineligible to vote,

if a group or agency casts a net that captures someone ELIGIBLE, then seems to me there are civil rights involved.