In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled OH could continue to remove individuals from voter rolls if they had not voted in two federal elections and have not responded to a confirmation notice or update their registration.
Queen said Kentucky has properly removed almost half a million voters since 2011. "In my view, Ohio's program does just that". If the voter doesn't respond to the notice, update his address or registration information or perform an election activity, such as voting or signing a state ballot measure petition within four years, the voter's registration is canceled.
"Over the last five years, key Supreme Court decisions have undermined the franchise of millions of Americans", Grimes said.
The Supreme Court majority said OH didn't violate that provision. In the majority decision, Justice Samuel Alito wrote Ohio's approach was lawful. In recent years, the courts blocked states from verifying the citizenship status of individuals registering to vote.
To be certain, there's value in states maintaining accurate voter lists. 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. The NVRA specifically allows states to remove, on change of residence grounds, a registered would-be voter who does not vote, who then fails to respond to a notice, and who then fails to vote in any election during the period covering the next two general federal elections.
All states are required to periodically comb the voter rolls for people who may have moved to another state - a process known as list maintenance.
The administration of former president Barack Obama had opposed Ohio's process of purging voters, but Donald Trump's administration threw its support behind the midwestern state.
How to have tough conversations about mental health
According to the CDC , suicide rates have increased more than 25% since 1999. "These findings are disturbing", Schuchat says. The Minnesota Health Department has increased efforts to identify at-risk communities to help reduce suicides.
The dissenters included Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute has undermined that founding principle.
That act prevents states from canceling voter registrations exclusively because those registered do not show up to vote.
It's considered one of the stricter laws in the nation, but it's not unique.
The four liberal justices dissented. He voted in the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections but did not vote in 2012, saying he was unimpressed by the candidates.
Absent evidence that Ohio's rules are based on discriminatory intent - and none was presented - OH shouldn't be estopped from attempts, in compliance with federal statutes, to maintain the integrity of its registrations rolls merely because members of certain groups may be unwilling, disproportionately, to take the simple measures needed to stay eligible.
Belladona-Carrera says she anxious the ruling will be used by lawmakers in more states to adopt the OH system.
This case, like many others, should never even have been in court, allowing wayward judges and the ACLU to lock up a commonsense law for several years and election cycles.