John Roberts is all about shutting down democracy, and he long ago understood that one of the most effective ways to shut down democracy is to shut down access to the vote for people who are likely to vote against the interests of predatory capitalists: to disenfranchise Democrats and Democratic-leaning constituencies.
It was for this moment that John Roberts was placed on the Court. The erosion of the Voting Rights Act, the obscenity of Citizens’ United–sure, those were important: but giving a green light to the Republican Party’s massive, dark-money-funded, 50-state voter suppression/disenfranchisement project, and doing it in time to impact the 2018 mid-terms—that’s the real deal for Roberts.
“Will SCOTUS Green-Light Ohio’s Hardcore Voter Purge Regime Nationwide?”
Note to TPM: Never put “SCOTUS” and “Hardcore” in the same headline.
It just gets Justice Thomas way too excited…
Of COURSE they’ll greenlight it.
Is this a serious question?
Chief Justice John Roberts challenged the idea that nonvoting was the only factor Ohio was using, since the state also sent out the confirmation mailers.
There’s no proof they sent out confirmation mailers unless they sent all of them by registered mail, which didn’t happen.
There is glaring error in this article. The article refers to Justice Alito and others of his ilk as “Conservative”. No conservative judge could possibly support voter purges. Rather Alito and the others of his ilk are REPUBLICAN justices who make their decisions based on party affiliation and the constitution be damned.
Justice Anthony Kennedy’s questions didn’t reveal much about his thinking.
Really the only meaningful detail from the hearing.
Dem states have to respond in kind, if this shit goes down. Send mailers to everyone with a hunting or gun license requiring them to confirm their address and stating that if they don’t respond affirmatively within 30 days they will be presumed to be no longer resident and purged from the voter roll. All very reasonable to maintain up-to-date voter rolls.
I think this bit is notable too:
And he even questioned whether a person has the constitutional right to vote
That’s some advocate for democracy there, gotta say.
I’m trying to like your comment but my computer sucks.
Also, nonvoting is what triggers the sending of the mailer in the first place.
I’m trying to think of something insightful, or at least funny, to add here, but I got nothin’.
I’m really having trouble believing that she heard him correctly. It is well established that voting is a fundemental right, though Roberts has been active in finding typically Roberts twisty ways not to subject voting rights cases to the strict scrutiny standard of review (which is what distinguishes a “fundemental” right from other rights).
If he really said that, it’s a huge WTF red flashing light moment that I’d expect to see legal commentators already screaming about.
So not buying a gun and getting a postcard eliminates that right?
Thinking the same thing here. That just doesn’t sound right, but then not much has lately
Yeah, Robert’s comment is really strange…it may be based on there not being an explicit right to vote written in the Constitution until after the 15th amendment was ratified, so going to the idea of originalism. However, it is plainly right there, and it sounds a whole lot like the 2nd amendment:
“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
Of course, they are trying to color this (ahem) by saying people may have moved out of the district, but if that is the case then the state should be able to show that quite easily using the other records at their disposal. The states should be required to keep accurate voting rolls, which means making sure to include all of the voters in a district…Republicans don’t like that part, but then they keep power by making sure people don’t vote, which goes right against the reason we have a nation to begin with.
This cheered me up a little bit…
There is a a large body of SCOTUS case law declaring voting a fundamental right.
Chief Justice John Roberts . . . even questioned whether a person has the constitutional right to vote
Excuse me??? The right to vote is specifically addressed in at least five sections of the Constitution.
What is Roberts smoking?
How does refraining from using a right disqualify you from its protections under our system of government? As an American citizen, you have a right to vote. Unless you don’t vote, in which case you no longer have that right until you jump through these hoops to prove to the government that you actually deserve that right. Some citizens have more rights than others. Equal protections under the law, my ass!
You know, where it says that if you didn’t buy a gun last year, you can’t buy one this year.