Misleading
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Register
Misleading
  • About Us
  • Log in
  • Don’t Mislead (Archive)
  • Privacy Policy
No Result
View All Result
Misleading
No Result
View All Result

Supreme Court’s Virginia Ruling Stuns Legal Analysts: ‘Disgraceful’

October 30, 2024
in Missleading
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0 0
A A
0
Supreme Court’s Virginia Ruling Stuns Legal Analysts: ‘Disgraceful’
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Legal analysts have expressed their shock at Wednesday’s Supreme Court ruling that backed removing noncitizen voters from the Virginia electoral roll.

The six-judge conservative majority allowed Virginia to continue with a program to remove around 1,600 noncitizen voters. The three liberal judges dissented.

Noncitizens are not entitled to vote in elections, but the immigration status of the 1,600 is disputed.

The Purcell Principle was invoked by a federal court in Alabama on Tuesday, in which it said that its changes to the handling of mail-in ballots should not be implemented until after the 2024 presidential election. It is generally accepted that changes should not come in the days before an election to avoid confusion among election workers.

In response to the Supreme Court decision, former federal prosecutor Joyce Vance commented on X, formerly Twitter: “In a disgraceful departure from the so-called Purcell principle which SCOTUS uses to reject changes too close to elections, they will permit Virginia to continue to remove voters from the rolls. The liberal justices all dissent.”

virginia voters
A voter casts her ballot accompanied by three children at Haymarket Elementary School November 7, 2023 in Haymarket, Virginia. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed a program in the state to purge nonvoters from the…
A voter casts her ballot accompanied by three children at Haymarket Elementary School November 7, 2023 in Haymarket, Virginia. The U.S. Supreme Court has backed a program in the state to purge nonvoters from the electoral roll before the presidential election.

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Lawyer and legal commentator Laurence Tribe wrote on X that the Supreme Court decision is “a bad sign.”

“It suggests an unchastened Supreme Court poised to help Trump suppress lawful votes on the flimsiest basis. I still think the Roberts Six won’t succeed, but it won’t be for want of trying,” Tribe added.

The Roberts Six refers to the six conservative judges on the Supreme Court, including Chief Justice John Roberts.

Marc E. Elias, a lawyer and founder of the watchdog group Democracy Docket, wrote that the Supreme Court has reinstated “Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin‘s voter purge program.”

“This only affects a small number of people but is a wrongheaded decision in light of clear federal law,” Elias said.

Newsweek sought email comment from Youngkin’s office and from the Donald Trump presidential campaign on Wednesday.

On its website, Democracy Docket states that it is a “progressive platform for information, analysis and opinion about voting rights, elections and democracy.”

Philip Kline, the former Republican attorney general of Kansas, warmly welcomed the decision.

On X, he wrote that the case reveals “the prevailing lack of respect for the Constitution & the role of the Court in the Biden Administration.”

David Gelman, an attorney, who declares in his X profile that he is a legal surrogate for Donald Trump, also expressed his support.

“Not only was this the correct decision, this was the only decision! Thank you SCOTUS for doing the right thing in this purely political law,” Gelman wrote on X.

The Supreme Court’s temporary injunction prevents a federal judge from restoring the 1,600 voters to the electoral roll before election day.

U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles, a President Joe Biden appointee, ruled on Friday that the removal of the 1,600 violated federal law, as it took place during a 90-day “quiet period” before a presidential election.

The quiet period is mandated to avoid the risk of mistakenly removing legitimate voters just before the election.

On Sunday, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed Judge Giles’ initial decision, finding that Virginia’s data-matching efforts did not sufficiently prove that those removed were noncitizens.

The state’s plan marked individuals for removal if they either checked a box on a Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) form indicating they are not citizens or left that box blank. State officials said that any flagged voter received a notice and had two weeks to contest the disqualification.

Youngkin posted on X: “We are pleased by the Supreme Court’s order today. This is a victory for common sense and election fairness.” He added: “Clean voter rolls are one important part of a comprehensive approach we are taking to ensure the fairness of our elections.”

Previous Post

Illegal Immigration: Texas Buys Ranch To Boost Trump’s Wall

Next Post

Trump’s Plans Take a Page from China’s Authoritarian Playbook | Opinion

Related Posts

The Flamingo Revolution: How Jared Kushner’s island fantasy echoes the kind of story it’d take to build a five‑star resort on top of the Grand Canyon
Don’t Mislead

The Flamingo Revolution: How Jared Kushner’s island fantasy echoes the kind of story it’d take to build a five‑star resort on top of the Grand Canyon

July 1, 2026
Misleading: No RFP, No Competition — Now the Reflecting Pool Fix Costs Millions More
Don’t Mislead

Misleading: No RFP, No Competition — Now the Reflecting Pool Fix Costs Millions More

June 12, 2026
Watch an East Coast luxury car dealer face extortion on a One-Star Google Business Review. How Misleading can these reviews be?
Don’t Mislead

Watch an East Coast luxury car dealer face extortion on a One-Star Google Business Review. How Misleading can these reviews be?

June 1, 2026
Same Network? Sure. Same Priority? Not Even Close. Mint, Patriot & Other MVNOs Play the Misleading Game
Don’t Mislead

Same Network? Sure. Same Priority? Not Even Close. Mint, Patriot & Other MVNOs Play the Misleading Game

May 27, 2026
Controversial: Eileen Wang’s Case Becomes the Latest Battleground of ‘Who’s Really Influencing Whom
Don’t Mislead

Controversial: Eileen Wang’s Case Becomes the Latest Battleground of ‘Who’s Really Influencing Whom

May 26, 2026
SOAS Director Warns: Forget Oil — Trump’s War Might Blow Up Helium and Fertilizer Supplies Too 
Don’t Mislead

SOAS Director Warns: Forget Oil — Trump’s War Might Blow Up Helium and Fertilizer Supplies Too 

May 18, 2026
Next Post
Trump’s Plans Take a Page from China’s Authoritarian Playbook | Opinion

Trump's Plans Take a Page from China's Authoritarian Playbook | Opinion

Prosecutors Want Pentagon Leaker Jack Teixeira to Serve 17 Years in Prison

Prosecutors Want Pentagon Leaker Jack Teixeira to Serve 17 Years in Prison

Please login to join discussion
Misleading

Misleading is your trusted source for uncovering fake news, analyzing misinformation, and educating readers about deceptive media tactics. Join the fight for truth today!

TRENDING

No Content Available

LATEST

The Flamingo Revolution: How Jared Kushner’s island fantasy echoes the kind of story it’d take to build a five‑star resort on top of the Grand Canyon

Misleading: No RFP, No Competition — Now the Reflecting Pool Fix Costs Millions More

Watch an East Coast luxury car dealer face extortion on a One-Star Google Business Review. How Misleading can these reviews be?

  • About Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA
  • Cookie Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions

Copyright © 2025 Misleading.
Misleading is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • About Us
  • Log in
  • Don’t Mislead (Archive)
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Misleading.
Misleading is not responsible for the content of external sites.