FOLLOW US

The U.S. Supreme Court, split along ideological lines, granted an emergency request from Virginia on Wednesday to continue removing suspected noncitizens from its voter rolls, suspending a federal district court order that had previously halted the program. The decision allows Virginia to maintain its voter roll purge just days ahead of a major election, a move opposed by the federal government and advocacy groups who argue it wrongfully strips eligible citizens of their voting rights.

Court Decision Divides Justices, Permits Voter Roll Purge

Without providing specific reasoning, the Supreme Court’s majority approved Virginia's request to override an order from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The lower court's ruling had paused the state's efforts to eliminate “self-identified noncitizens” from its voter rolls and required the state to re-register 1,600 previously removed individuals. Virginia officials argued that the order would compel them to violate state law prohibiting noncitizen voting, while opponents insisted the voter roll purge risked disenfranchising U.S. citizens.

According to advocacy groups and the federal government, Virginia’s voter roll purge inadvertently targeted citizens. These groups argue that keeping purged voters off the rolls contravenes both constitutional protections and the National Voter Registration Act's (NVRA) 90-day “quiet period” rule, which prevents voter removals close to federal elections.

Legal and Political Support for Virginia’s Voter Purge Program

More than half of U.S. states, the Republican National Committee, and a group of former Republican Congress members backed Virginia in its Supreme Court appeal, stressing that the district court order had created confusion leading into Election Day. Kansas and 25 other GOP-led states argued that the NVRA’s 90-day restriction on purging ineligible voters was never intended to include Virginia’s process of removing noncitizens.

The Republican Party also emphasized in its brief that the lower court’s intent to promote voter participation could backfire by undermining confidence in the vote, potentially resulting in the inclusion of ineligible voters. Conversely, the former lawmakers contended that the court's decision to halt Virginia’s voter roll purge was entirely consistent with the NVRA’s intent to prevent disenfranchisement.

DOJ and Advocacy Groups Argue “Quiet Period” Provision Violated

The federal government and advocacy groups maintain that Virginia's program improperly removes voters close to federal elections, directly violating the NVRA’s “quiet period” provision. The statute allows voter removal during this period only for specific reasons, such as death or criminal convictions, rather than systematic purges of potentially eligible voters. Virginia's program relies on state and federal database checks, which opponents argue are based on outdated information, such as old driver’s license records, leading to wrongful purging of naturalized citizens.

Virginia’s emergency petition, stemming from lawsuits by the Department of Justice and advocacy groups, argues that Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles’ Oct. 25 order is overly broad and unfairly applied the NVRA to noncitizens, who are not considered “eligible voters” under federal law. Virginia claims that the NVRA’s protections apply exclusively to citizens, making the 90-day rule irrelevant to its removal of noncitizens.

Virginia voter roll purge : Advocacy Groups Challenge Purcell Doctrine Claim

Judge Giles’ ruling also drew on the Purcell v. Gonzalez doctrine, which discourages federal court decisions that alter voting rules close to elections. Virginia contested this, claiming the doctrine shouldn’t apply since the purge was an executive order adjustment, not a direct change to state law. Advocacy groups, however, argue the program introduced uncertainty and violated the NVRA’s intent, thus making the Purcell doctrine inapplicable.

Virginia’s Roll Purge Program Faces Scrutiny Amid Secrecy Allegations

Virginia's program has come under fire for allegedly operating with minimal transparency. Advocates have pointed to a lack of safeguards to confirm that purges do not remove citizens mistakenly flagged as noncitizens. The DOJ and other advocacy groups argue that, without adequate checks, the voter roll purge program threatens to undermine the integrity of the voter registration process.

The Campaign Legal Center and other legal organizations representing the advocacy groups asserted that Virginia's method of purging, while ostensibly individualized, has affected naturalized citizens whose statuses may have been mistakenly flagged, rather than following an individualized review process as the state claimed.

What’s Next for Virginia Voter Roll Purge?

As Election Day approaches, Virginia's continuation of the voter roll purge remains a contentious issue, with both supporters and opponents watching closely to gauge its impact on voter turnout and electoral integrity. This decision underscores ongoing tensions surrounding voter roll management, particularly the balance between ensuring accurate rolls and protecting eligible citizens from disenfranchisement.