Appeals Court Puts Brakes On Immediate Voter Purge In Wisconsin

An appeals court ordered a freeze Tuesday on a purge of more than 200,000 people from the voting rolls in Wisconsin, contradicting a circuit court judge who held the Elections Commission in contempt Monday for not removing the voters immediately.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://talkingpointsmemo.com/?p=1284392

When a higher court blocks a lower court judge’s contempt ruling, that’s basically showing contempt for that judge is how I read it. Too bad they can’t impeach his ass too.

40 Likes

Obviously the legal system leans D

:rofl:

7 Likes

What’s the rush? If they don’t respond by 2021, thereby giving them plenty of time to get back to the government, they can be notified that they’ll be purged from the rolls. The GOP is so worried that Trump can’t win the state that they are willing to lie, cheat, and steal to get their way. Their thirst for power is beyond alarming at this point.

21 Likes

We’re probably going to see a fair bit of this going forward as judges with integrity, including some w/ nominally conservative bona fides, reverse the decisions of reich-wing/Trumpist judges. Unfortunately a lot of the latter have been elevated to appeals status by Republican controlled legislatures at both state and federal levels so we really need to win more elections at both levels if we wish to reverse the worst of the Republican/reich-wing laws/policies never mind actually making some progress toward a more just society.

23 Likes

The liberal League of Women Voters also filed a lawsuit…

The League of Women Voters is not “liberal”. They want equal access to the franchise for all voters.

65 Likes

Disenfranchising someone because they didn’t respond to a letter that there is no proof was delivered seems a little much…

29 Likes

Because facts have a liberal bias.

13 Likes

“a purge of more than 200,000 people” - based upon lists compiled some time ago -

so Democrats should be feverishly working to update the required info - reconfirming addresses - verifying eligibility - and ultimately establishing that the “200,000” list is woefully out of date and thus is unacceptable to use - a new extensive eligibility analysis would need to be conducted - as it would be unacceptable to conduct a "purge " based on a list that is now significantly incorrect - and would now be unjustifiably & knowingly purging legitimate voters.

4 Likes

Hey TPM — stop mislabeling the League of Women Voters as “liberal”. They are nonpartisan. You are spreading a false right wing meme.

52 Likes

The Cult of #45* will be howling about this insult to their reality.

Good.

9 Likes

Since no one knows who these 200K voters are, WisDems will use the state’s open records law to find out who’s on the list and then conduct massive voter outreach to help with re-registration and voter rolls corrections.

21 Likes

Keeping voters on the rolls costs almost nothing. The only reason is to purge lists quickly is to discourage voters who move more often - students, renters, other non-house owners, and those who vote sporadically, who I’m guessing Republicans think are likely Democratic voters.

27 Likes

In this case, “liberal” means ‘sane’. The antonym is “conservative” ~ ‘bat-shit crazy’.

To conservatives, there is no such thing as nonpartisan. You’re either with them or you’re against them.

15 Likes

The problem with this whole ‘respond to verify’ letter is a LOT of people do not open their mail if they don’t know who it is. I get voter surveys, campaign mail, 3rd party campaign info, it’s a LOT. (I also give to charities that I verify and sometimes I get 30-40 pieces of mail a day that I have to go thru and verify.)

I get a LOT of ‘voter surveys’ asking ‘what’s the most important issue’ and stuff like that. I can see how EVEN if I get something that looks official it might get misplaced or just, NO I DO NOT WANT TO ANSWER this particular survey.

IF somebody is a non-voter what the heck is the ISSUE here? That person just does not vote so WHO CARESS to purge them?

14 Likes

This is a surprise – the conservative justice Brian Hagedorn, who won his seat last year in a mild upset, voted with the two liberal justices to not take up the case. Had they done so, the decision would have been fast-tracked, and delivered before the election. I doubt that Hagedorn will maintain this stance when/if the case actually comes to them, but for now that time will come in 2021.

Yes, Wisconsin elects their Supreme Court justices. Koch brothers realized this several years ago. Let’s hope that changes soon.

14 Likes

Cripes, somebody ELSE I have to donate to!!! I already give to Mark Pocan and I did not give to WisDems this cycle yet. OK.

But isn’t this something the DNC should help with too?

8 Likes

How many letters do you get that are marked “Urgent” or “Important Info Regarding Your Vote!” and you trash w/o opening because of all the fund raising appeals and GOP faked-up “official” letters?

BTW, can’t the US Postal Service share info on residences with an official state agency?

21 Likes

When, oh, when will Wisconsin (and every other state) simplify voter laws to allow only white male property owners to vote? /s

I’m actually sort of surprised Rethugliklans haven’t floated that turd yet.

9 Likes

I usually avoid nit-picking the wording of articles here at TPM but this is at least the third time this error has appeared. The League of Women voters is scrupulously non-partisan.
I really appreciate TPM’s tracking of state-level voting rights cases and the brief recap of the history of the case after each new development. However, Kate Riga really needs to update the background paragraphs she appends to each new story.

16 Likes