The Supreme Court has an opportunity to uphold the integrity of Virginia’s voting system by allowing Governor Glenn Youngkin to remove approximately 1,600 noncitizens from the state’s voting rolls. Youngkin’s Executive Order 35, signed on August 7, includes a provision to strip from the voting lists individuals who have identified themselves as noncitizens when filling out forms for the Department of Motor Vehicles.
This is a straightforward and lawful step, as Virginia law does not permit noncitizens to vote. In fact, the Justice Department precleared a Virginia law in 2006 that allows election officials to remove ineligible voters from the rolls as part of “daily maintenance” of registrations. This law was signed by Democratic Governor Tim Kaine, who later became the party’s nominee for vice president.
The only distinction in Youngkin’s order is to specify that county registrars should use DMV information to help them with this task. This is a reasonable exercise of due diligence, as it ensures that individuals who have identified themselves as noncitizens are not allowed to vote.
However, President Joe Biden’s Justice Department is opposed to this effort, claiming that it violates a part of the National Voter Registration Act that prohibits states from “systematic” efforts to remove names from voter lists within 90 days of an election. A federal district judge and three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, all appointees of Presidents Barack Obama and Biden, have ruled in favor of Biden’s motion, blocking Youngkin’s executive order.
This ruling is based on a flawed interpretation of the law, as Youngkin and state officials are not perpetrating a “systematic” voter purge. Instead, they are using ordinary efforts to apply the law on an individual basis, based on each resident’s self-identification on a state form. The state also has a fail-safe system in place, notifying individuals who believe their name was removed from voter lists in error and giving them 14 days to correct the record or cast a provisional ballot on Election Day.
Virginia’s system is fair and sensible, and this is not just about the presidential race. The state has elections for the Senate, the House, local school boards, municipal governments, and several issue propositions next week, and the outcome of these elections could be closely contested. From a practical standpoint, Youngkin’s rule is preferable to the alternative, as it allows individuals who believe they are valid voters to cast a provisional vote on Election Day, and if they are legitimate voters, then the vote will count.
The Supreme Court should overturn the lower-court judges and allow Youngkin’s program to resume, upholding the integrity of Virginia’s voting system and protecting the rights of eligible voters.
