Judge blocks use of federal database to check citizenship, saying it could wrongly purge voters

6 hours ago by MicroWave to c/politics

A federal judge has ruled that a revamped federal tool that state election officials have used in their efforts to identify illegally registered noncitizen voters is unlawful and cannot be used.

A federal judge on Monday ruled that a recently revamped version of a federal tool central to the Trump administration’s election integrity strategy is unlawful and can no longer be used.

U.S. District Court Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan sided with advocacy groups that argued the recent upgrades to the program, called Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, aggregated Americans’ sensitive personal data in a way that could result in voters being wrongly purged from voter rolls.

“All in all, the federal government has knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote,” Sooknanan said in an order explaining the decision. “This Court cannot stand idly by while that happens.”

Jhex 25 points 5 hours ago

Pedophilia Team: … but purging votes is the whole point you honor!

path: 0 24388183, hotness: undefined, score: 25, children: 0
FiniteBanjo 13 points 6 hours ago

I have been pleasantly but consistently surprised by the number of times the courts have sided against Trump, given his number of nominations in his first and current terms.

Even the stacked SCOTUS seems to be 50:50 at times, though they're very shortsighted for gutting the Voting Rights Act which could lead to all of them being purged at some point.

path: 0 24387922, hotness: undefined, score: 13, children: 1
Lasherz12 6 points 5 hours ago

I think they're finding it more difficult when it's written directly into the constitution that the states run the election and not the federal government. That isn't to say that they need to justify their decisions since they have gotten away with providing such hollowed out reason that a standard cannot be extrapolated to the lower courts, but I think when it's right there in the constitution in plain English it becomes a question of whether or not the judicial branch should have the power it grabbed early on in the union, and that threatens all judges, not just them.

path: 0 24387922 24388450, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0
PagPag 1 point 5 hours ago

It’ll go to the Supreme Court. In one way or another, perhaps via shadow docket.

path: 0 24388735, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
BrianTheeBiscuiteer 1 point 3 hours ago

"Could..." Oh, my sweet Summer child.

path: 0 24389754, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
politics
politics

@lemmy.world

login for more options
30158
30920
9765

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

go to feed...