Supreme Court OKs Ohio Voter Purge Law

Bryan Woolston via ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Earlier this year I was pondering whether Ohio’s voter removal law was legal. Referring to section (d) of the 1993 motor voter law, I said:

The Ohio program follows this to the letter.

Today the Supreme Court ruled that:

Ohio’s removal process follows subsection (d) to the letter.

And thus Ohio’s program for maintaining voter rolls is legal. Apparently I’m getting better at this Supreme Court prediction stuff! In any case, I’m sticking with my original view: the Ohio law pushes right to the edge of what’s legal under federal law, but it doesn’t go beyond. It’s legal and, what’s more, probably not that big a deal. Today’s court opinion does not appear to be an expansive new grant of power to purge unwanted voters, nor does it suggest that the motor voter law itself is problematic. The ruling simply says that if you follow the law precisely, then you can purge voters from the rolls.

Aside from the fact that I’d like to do away with voter registration entirely, none of this strikes me as either unreasonable or likely to change things significantly.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest