Overview
The Department of Justice (DOJ) has launched a lawsuit against Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin’s administration, claiming his efforts to remove noncitizens from the state’s voter rolls violate federal law. The lawsuit focuses on Virginia’s approach to updating voter lists ahead of elections, which the DOJ argues infringes on the National Voter Registration Act’s Quiet Period Provision.
Why It Matters
The case touches on the critical issue of election integrity, as states must balance the accuracy of voter rolls with federal guidelines meant to protect citizens’ voting rights.
Who It Impacts
The lawsuit affects eligible voters across Virginia, as well as other states facing similar scrutiny over voter roll maintenance ahead of elections.
Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin’s administration is under fire from the Department of Justice (DOJ) for its efforts to remove noncitizens from the state’s voter rolls ahead of a federal election. The DOJ argues that Youngkin’s executive order, which mandates the removal of noncitizens who fail to confirm their citizenship within 14 days, violates the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Specifically, the DOJ claims that Virginia is conducting its voter maintenance program too close to the upcoming election, infringing on the Quiet Period Provision that restricts such activity within 90 days of a federal election.
According to the DOJ’s complaint, the state identified potential noncitizens based on responses to citizenship status questions provided during transactions with the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The lawsuit alleges that the state’s actions could disenfranchise eligible voters, particularly those mistakenly flagged as noncitizens, and seeks an injunction to halt further removals.
Virginia has defended its actions, pointing to state law passed in 2006 under then-Governor Tim Kaine, which requires the removal of noncitizens from voter rolls. The governor’s office, through a memo from Richard Cullen, counselor to the governor, argues that Virginia’s process is not systematic but individualized, ensuring the correction of voter records. The state claims it provides multiple notifications to those whose voter registration may be canceled and offers same-day voter registration to rectify any errors. Governor Youngkin himself has criticized the lawsuit, calling it a “desperate attempt” to undermine the legitimacy of Virginia’s elections.
The case has attracted national attention, as concerns about voter roll accuracy and potential noncitizen voting have become central to election integrity debates. Youngkin’s approach reflects broader efforts by Republicans to safeguard elections by removing noncitizens from voter lists, while Democrats and the DOJ have raised concerns about potential voter disenfranchisement.
This lawsuit is part of a larger trend, with the DOJ also suing Alabama for similar actions. The ongoing debate over voter roll maintenance has led to legislative efforts like the SAVE Act, which would require states to obtain proof of citizenship during voter registration. Republican lawmakers have pushed for these measures, arguing that maintaining clean voter rolls is essential to preventing voter fraud, while Democrats emphasize the need to protect access to the ballot box for all eligible voters.
Governor Youngkin’s administration maintains that it is following state law in its actions, and the outcome of this legal battle could set a significant precedent for how states handle voter roll updates in the future. As the lawsuit unfolds, the balance between ensuring election integrity and protecting voter rights remains a key issue in the lead-up to the next federal election.
The broader issue at hand is the potential clash between state and federal laws regarding voter roll maintenance. For many, the lawsuit underscores a growing tension between efforts to ensure the integrity of elections and the risk of inadvertently disenfranchising eligible voters. The DOJ’s action against Virginia highlights this critical juncture as both sides prepare for legal and political battles that could shape future election laws.
