Judge Orders Virginia to Reinstate Over 1,600 Voter Registrations

Judge Orders Virginia to Reinstate Over 1,600 Voter Registrations \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ A federal judge has ordered Virginia to reinstate over 1,600 voter registrations, which she ruled were illegally canceled during a restricted period ahead of the November election. The Justice Department argued the purge violated federal protections against large-scale changes to voter rolls close to an election. The ruling faces criticism, with Virginia’s governor and attorney general voicing concerns about reinstating voters flagged as noncitizens, while others argue the purge unlawfully disenfranchised eligible voters.

Judge Orders Virginia to Reinstate 1,600 Canceled Voter Registrations: Quick Look

• Federal Ruling: Judge Patricia Giles ordered Virginia to restore over 1,600 voter registrations, citing federal law prohibiting large-scale voter roll changes close to an election.
• Justice Department’s Case: The DOJ argued that the cancellations were unlawful, occurring during the “quiet period” meant to protect voters from erroneous removals.
• State’s Defense: Virginia officials stated that only self-identified noncitizens were affected, flagged based on Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) data and notified prior to removal.
• Plaintiffs’ Argument: Voter advocates noted that many removals were likely errors, potentially impacting U.S. citizens marked as noncitizens by mistake.
• Governor’s Response: Gov. Glenn Youngkin defended the executive order as upholding voter integrity, while Rep. Gerry Connolly praised the ruling for safeguarding voting rights.

Deep Look:

In a significant ruling just days before the November election, U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles ordered Virginia to reinstate over 1,600 voter registrations that had been removed under a new state initiative aimed at identifying noncitizens on the voter rolls. Judge Giles granted an emergency injunction sought by the Justice Department (DOJ), which argued the cancellations violated federal law by disrupting the voter rolls within the “quiet period” 90 days before an election.

The case centers on Virginia’s recent changes to its voter-roll maintenance practices. In August, Gov. Glenn Youngkin issued an executive order requiring the state to cross-check daily DMV records against the voter rolls to identify potential noncitizens. Officials claim the policy was intended to protect election integrity by ensuring only eligible U.S. citizens could vote. Under the new system, if someone appeared as a noncitizen in DMV data, they were notified and given two weeks to respond with proof of citizenship. If they failed to do so, their voter registration was canceled.

However, the timing of this executive order raised legal concerns. Federal law restricts states from making broad changes to voter lists within 90 days of an election to prevent eligible voters from being inadvertently removed close to voting day. Judge Giles, in her ruling, noted that Virginia did not provide clear evidence that those purged were, in fact, noncitizens. She added that any removal of noncitizens during the quiet period should have been conducted on an individual basis rather than through a large-scale purge, which risked disenfranchising legitimate voters.

In court, DOJ attorney Sejal Jhaveri emphasized that federal regulations are designed to prevent large voter list modifications near elections, reducing the risk of mistaken cancellations that could affect eligible citizens. According to the DOJ and groups like the League of Women Voters, many individuals purged from the rolls likely lost their voting rights due to simple errors or accidental misclassifications by the DMV. For instance, a common error is mischecking a box on DMV forms, which can mistakenly designate a U.S. citizen as a noncitizen.

Virginia’s attorney, Charles Cooper, argued that the state’s actions did not violate the spirit of federal protections. He emphasized that the federal law is not designed to protect noncitizens, who are ineligible to vote. “Congress couldn’t have intended to block states from removing ineligible noncitizens from voter rolls, especially when they were never legally eligible to vote,” Cooper said.

However, plaintiffs in the case pointed out that Virginia’s new approach, based on DMV data, was far from error-proof. Although the exact number of affected U.S. citizens remains unclear, the plaintiffs presented anecdotal evidence of individuals flagged and purged as noncitizens in error. Cooper acknowledged that the DMV data might not be foolproof, but countered that reinstating all 1,600 voters would inevitably put some noncitizens back on the rolls, undermining election integrity.

Rep. Gerry Connolly, a Democrat from Virginia who had alerted DOJ officials to the purge, praised the decision as a defense of voting rights for eligible citizens in the state. “The governor’s policy has one goal: to disenfranchise lawful voters. This ruling is a victory for democracy,” Connolly said in a statement.

Virginia’s Republican Attorney General Jason Miyares sharply criticized the court’s decision, calling it “a blow to voter integrity.” In a statement, Miyares argued, “It should never be illegal to remove illegal voters from the rolls. Today, the court has forced Virginia to reinstate noncitizens, just before a presidential election, undermining election security.” Former President Donald Trump also voiced his dissatisfaction, calling the ruling “a travesty” and reiterating his belief that only citizens should be able to vote.

Gov. Youngkin defended his executive order, noting that previous administrations had conducted similar voter roll reviews, though without the daily checks implemented by his administration. He contended that the DOJ and federal court are unfairly targeting his administration’s efforts to prevent voter fraud. “It’s wrong for federal interference to stop us from removing noncitizens who self-identified as such,” Youngkin said, emphasizing that state officials provided flagged individuals an opportunity to appeal before removal.

Judge Giles’ order mandates that Virginia reinstate the voter registrations affected by the purge and notify those individuals of their restored status within five days. The notification letters will remind recipients that if they are indeed noncitizens, they are prohibited from voting under federal law.

While plaintiffs had requested that reinstated voters receive extended time to apply for absentee ballots, Giles declined, stating that such extensions could confuse voters.

In a similar case, a federal judge in Alabama recently ruled that the state must reinstate over 3,200 voter registrations canceled on similar grounds, with court testimony revealing that around 2,000 of those voters were, in fact, legally registered citizens.

The ruling has sparked national debate over the extent to which state efforts to prevent noncitizen voting may endanger the rights of legitimate voters. Youngkin’s executive order also underscores a rising trend among states to implement increasingly frequent checks of DMV and other government data against voter rolls—a practice critics argue can often lead to errors and unwarranted disenfranchisement of citizens. With nearly 6 million registered voters in Virginia, the decision will likely affect hundreds of thousands as election administrators and legal experts work through the implications of the court’s order.

More on Elections