This Supreme Court Case Could Safeguard the Integrity of Our Elections

[Geee]

Heritage Foundation

During the recent government funding debate, Democrats insisted on a “clean” Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals bill. Clean voter rolls? Not so much.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, a case out of Ohio involving the integrity of elections.
More specifically, at issue is Ohio’s practice of keeping its voter registration rolls “clean” and up to date through an elaborate six-year-plus process intended to remove the names of voters who have died or moved, either within the state or out of state, as well as duplicate registrations.
Democrats and their liberal interest-group allies, who apparently prefer “dirty” and outdated voter rolls, are seeking to prevent Ohio from continuing this practice.
Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can't be done alone. Find out more >>
They contend that Ohio’s procedure violates the 1993 federal National Voter Registration Act, better known as the “motor voter” law, which prohibits the government from canceling registrations solely for not voting.
Ohio, represented by Secretary of State Jon Husted, denies that that’s what’s happening in the Buckeye State.
Names are not removed arbitrarily, much less solely for the act of not voting, but rather only after a lengthy process of attempting to verify continued residence at the same address.