There is no rational argument against this very reasonable method and timing for maintaining accurate voter rolls; unless, of course, you want a bevy of outdated information on the rolls to exploit.
Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that Ohio’s method of removing names from its voter rolls does not violate federal law.
The decision was 5-4.Monday’s ruling concerning the battleground state comes as the country gears up for midterm elections this fall. At least six other states have similar laws, and the ruling could embolden others to follow suit and enact what critics say are aggressive purges of voter rolls.Ohio law allows the state to send address confirmation notices to voters who have not engaged in voter activity for two years. If a voter returns the notice through prepaid mail, or responds online, the information is updated. If the notice is ignored and the voter fails to update a registration over the next four years, the registration is canceled.
Why are Democrats opposed to this? Should cut down, if any, on dead Russian votes.
Unless the dead voting is an exclusive Democrat thing.
I actually don’t see a big problem with this, SCOTUS did their job.
Although I would rather see it done every 4 – 5 years. There are many voters who are presidential only voters unfortunately. But frankly every state should have the option of day of registration with a photo ID and another identifying piece of info. And registration should be automatic thru the DMV and any govt department where you deal with your address. We should be making it easier not more difficult to vote.
But, I am fine with keeping the voter rolls relatively clean.
High turnout favors Democrats
Low turnout favors Republican .
This 5-4 decision just reinforces the Republicans plans to make it harder , not easier to vote .
The sanctimony about a plan to restrict our democracy in action rather than keep it as open as possible is pious hogwash .