News

Judicial Watch wins suit, California forced to remove up to 1.5 million inactive voters and ‘clean up’ its rolls

January 4, 2019 | | Print Article

 

(Video screenshot/Wikimedia public domain)

A lawsuit brought by forth by the watchdog group Judicial Watch is forcing Los Angeles County to excise an estimated 1.5 million inactive voters from its voter rolls, and the state of California must update its voter registration rules so it complies with federal law.

Filed in 2017, the suit accused both Los Angeles County and the state of failing to abide by the National Voter Registration Act, which mandates the removal of voters who fail to participate in two consecutive general federal elections, i.e., who fail to vote for four years.

The lawsuit specifically alleged that both Los Angeles County and the state of California had “more voter registrations” on their voter rolls than “who are old enough to register.”

“Los Angeles County has a registration rate of 112 percent of its adult citizen population,” the watchdog group noted in a statement Thursday. “The entire State of California has a registration rate of about 101 percent of its age-eligible citizenry.”

In other words, more eligible people were registered to vote in Los Angeles County and California than actually lived in either area. This suggests that some voters died or moved out of the state, but their voter registration data was never scrubbed.

This is a concern because of the tendency by some political activists to cheat elections via voter fraud. And one form of voter fraud just happens to involve using the registration information of relocated or sometimes even dead voters to cast a vote in favor of their preferred candidate.

Through its lawsuit, Judicial Watch discovered that Los Angeles County’s voter records alone contained 1.5 million inactive/ineligible voters and that neither the county nor the state of California had removed from their registration rolls in 20 years.

Thanks to a settlement reached on Wednesday, these “voters” will not be on the rolls anymore.

“The new settlement agreement, filed today with U.S. District Court Judge Manuel L. Real, requires all of the 1.5 million potentially ineligible registrants to be notified and asked to respond,” Judicial Watch reported. “If there is no response, those names are to be removed as required by the NVRA.”

“California Secretary of State Padilla also agrees to update the State’s online NVRA manual to make clear that ineligible names must be removed and to notify each California county that they are obligated to do this. This should lead to cleaner voter rolls statewide.”

Learn more below:

 

“This settlement vindicates Judicial Watch’s groundbreaking lawsuits to clean up state voter rolls to help ensure cleaner elections,” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

“Judicial Watch and its clients are thrilled with this historic settlement that will clean up election rolls in Los Angeles County and California – and set a nationwide precedent to ensure that states take reasonable steps to ensure that dead and other ineligible voters are removed from the rolls.”

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla released his own statement ensuring worried Democrats that the settlement would “not lead to unnecessary removal of active and eligible voters.”

“Safeguards remain in place to ensure … procedures are followed before canceling any voter registration records,” he said to the Associated Press.

Social media users seemed somewhat pleased by the outcome, though some wondered why it took until after the 2018 midterm elections for this ground-breaking settlement to be reached:

The latter tweet referred to a new practice among left-wing activists of “harvesting” ballots after an election so as to keep counting votes until their party wins. There’s no need to worry, however, as Judicial Watch has begun investigating this as well.

“Judicial Watch is concerned that this legal process which provides opportunity for fraud resulted in fraud. So we’re looking at the numbers, we’re looking to see whether or not we can verify the process work properly and is free of fraud,” Fitton said last month to One America News Network.

“That’s something that Judicial Watch is doing. The state in California I doubt is doing anything, so it’s up to Judicial Watch once again to come in and ask these straightforward questions.”

Listen:

HERE’S WHAT YOU’RE MISSING …

DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW

Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

$10
$15
$25
$50
Other
$
Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Vivek Saxena
Latest posts by Vivek Saxena (see all)

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

BPR INSIDER COMMENTS

Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!

Latest Articles