In a surprising decision, the Supreme Court has allowed Virginia’s Republican governor to go ahead with a last-minute purge of 1,600 voters—despite a clear federal law that’s supposed to prevent this very thing. By siding with Virginia in Beals v. Virginia Coalition for Immigrant Rights, the Court effectively allowed Virginia to ignore a key provision of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which restricts states from systematically removing voters from rolls within 90 days of a federal election. This decision is troubling because it could open the door for other states, like Texas and Florida, to do the same—and potentially on an even bigger scale.
The NVRA is meant to protect voters by preventing exactly this kind of last-minute removal of voters from the rolls. Virginia officials claim the purge only removed noncitizens, but a federal court later determined that some of those removed were, in fact, citizens eligible to vote. Virginia’s purge was challenged in lower courts, which ordered the state to reinstate the purged names, but the Supreme Court’s order allowed the purge to go forward without any clear explanation.
How Texas Could Use This Decision
Now, imagine a similar scenario unfolding in Texas. The day before a critical election, Texas officials might suddenly announce a purge of “noncitizens” or “ineligible” voters. Under this new precedent, they could conduct a mass removal of voters, using vague claims that those removed do not meet eligibility requirements. Picture Texans lining up on Election Day, only to find their names missing from the voter rolls, with no time to challenge the purge before the polls close. This would not only lead to massive confusion but could prevent thousands of lawful voters from casting their ballots.
The Florida Example: Last-Minute Changes on Election Eve
Florida could take this tactic even further, possibly purging thousands of voters just hours before polls open, citing updated records to justify their actions. Under Virginia’s reasoning, Florida might argue that the purged names were of noncitizens or otherwise ineligible individuals. Florida’s Attorney General could even attempt to defend this action by referencing Purcell v. Gonzalez, a prior Supreme Court decision cautioning against judicial interference with state election laws close to an election. By purging voters at the last minute, Florida officials could disrupt the voting process and cast doubt on the fairness of the entire election.
Why This Matters for Democracy
The Court’s decision to permit Virginia’s purge may seem minor now, but it paves the way for other states to conduct last-minute purges, undermining the security of federal elections across the country. Under this ruling, any state could ignore the NVRA’s 90-day rule, claiming that certain groups of voters are “noncitizens” or “ineligible” and purging them without giving people a chance to defend their right to vote. Imagine a close election in a battleground state, where thousands of voters find out on Election Day that they are no longer registered—those impacted would likely be from vulnerable communities who may not have the time or resources to challenge such decisions. This is how theocracy’s form.
The Urgent Need for Clear Voting Protections
This ruling sets a troubling precedent that weakens longstanding federal protections, ones that are supposed to ensure that elections are free and fair for all Americans. By allowing Virginia to sidestep a federal law designed to prevent last-minute voter purges, the Supreme Court risks normalizing these tactics and tilting the scales of democracy. As states across the country watch Virginia, they may feel empowered to implement similar purges, potentially altering election outcomes in close races.
To protect our democracy, it’s essential that federal laws like the NVRA remain robust, clearly enforced, and untouchable by last-minute political maneuvering. Without clear, consistent protections for voters, we risk allowing partisan tactics to interfere with fundamental democratic rights. The Court’s decision to let Virginia proceed with this purge may only be temporary, but its implications could be anything but.
