In a significant decision ahead of the upcoming election, the U.S. Supreme Court has cleared the way for Virginia to implement a controversial voter purge program, allowing the state to remove individuals it suspects of being noncitizens from voter rolls. The divided ruling, issued without a formal explanation by the majority conservative justices, was met with dissent from Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
The program aims to cross-reference state voter rolls with Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) records to identify noncitizens who may have inadvertently registered to vote. The Youngkin administration has framed the effort as essential for election integrity, ensuring only eligible citizens can cast ballots.
Good news. Virginia may now continue to enforce a law on the books since 2006, signed by a Democrat, to remove *self-identified non-citizens* (with safeguards in the event of error) from state voter rolls. The Court’s three leftists disagreed. https://t.co/XE54xzXfNF
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) October 30, 2024
In his statement following the ruling, Governor Youngkin called it “a victory for common sense and election fairness,” assuring Virginians that their elections would remain “secure and free from politically-motivated interference.”
However, the Biden administration, along with voting rights groups, has argued that the program is flawed and risks disenfranchising legitimate voters. They cite evidence from lower court proceedings suggesting that at least some eligible U.S. citizens were erroneously purged from the rolls. The dispute revolves around approximately 1,600 registrations tied to DMV data, which flagged individuals as noncitizens without verifying their actual citizenship status.
Opponents of the program relied on the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which prohibits states from conducting major changes to voter rolls within 90 days of a federal election. They argued that Youngkin’s purge order violated this “quiet period” and could result in widespread confusion for voters.
We are pleased by the Supreme Court’s order today. This is a victory for commonsense and election fairness. I am grateful for the work of Attorney General @JasonMiyaresVA on this critical fight to protect the fundamental rights of U.S. citizens. Clean voter rolls are one…
— Glenn Youngkin (@GlennYoungkin) October 30, 2024
Earlier this month, a U.S. District Court judge sided with the challengers, pausing the purge and ordering Virginia to reinstate the 1,600 registrations. The judge, Patricia Tolliver Giles, emphasized that state officials lacked verified data on the affected voters’ citizenship status. A three-judge panel from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals—composed of Democratic appointees—upheld most of the district court’s decision, maintaining the program’s suspension.
In their emergency appeal to the Supreme Court, Virginia officials leaned on the *Purcell principle*, which cautions federal courts against altering election rules too close to an election. The state argued that blocking the program now would create uncertainty and interfere with its election procedures.
Virginia also highlighted its same-day registration policy, noting that any voter removed in error could re-register at the polls on Election Day by affirming their citizenship status.
With the Supreme Court’s decision to lift the lower court’s pause, Virginia will now proceed with the purge, though it remains to be seen how the state will handle any erroneous removals.
Although Virginia is not considered a battleground state in the upcoming election, the ruling has heightened tensions between Democrats and Republicans. The debate over voter fraud versus voter suppression has become a defining issue in recent years, with Republicans emphasizing security and Democrats prioritizing voter access.
Critics of the program point out that the purge feeds into narratives about noncitizen voting, which have been repeatedly discredited but continue to circulate within some conservative circles, including former President Donald Trump’s.
As both sides brace for the electoral impact, the decision underscores the challenges of balancing election security with voter access—particularly in an era of heightened political division. The situation in Virginia may set a precedent for how courts handle last-minute election disputes in the future, with broader implications for upcoming elections across the country.
