Posts

Four Noncitizens Charged with Illegally Voting in 2020, 2022 and 2024 Federal Elections in New Jersey

/1 Comment/in , /by

Four noncitizens were charged with illegally voting in multiple federal elections and making false statements while applying for U.S. citizenship, federal prosecutors announced Friday.

According to criminal complaints filed in the District of New Jersey, each defendant allegedly cast ballots in at least one federal election, including the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections.

“Four individuals have been charged with illegally voting in federal elections and making false statements applying for U.S. citizenship,” FBI Director Kash Patel said in a post on X.

“The individuals — all noncitizens — voted in elections including the 2020 Presidential election, 2022 midterms, and 2024 Presidential election cycles.”

Prosecutors identified the defendants as David Neewilly, 73, of Atlantic County; Jacenth Beadle Exum, 70, of Bergen County; Idan Choresh, 43, of Monmouth County; and Abhinandan Vig, 33, of Monmouth County. (Read more from “Four Noncitizens Charged with Illegally Voting in 2020, 2022 and 2024 Federal Elections in New Jersey” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

IG Report: DHS Admitting Noncitizens Without ID May ‘Increase National Security Risks’

/1 Comment/in , /by

Federal agencies tasked with protecting U.S. borders have allowed illegal border crossers to enter the United States without adequate vetting and board domestic flights, a new Department of Homeland Security inspector general report found.

The 37-page document published on September 30 may be heavily redacted, but it paints a clear picture of the “potential risk” posed to Americans thanks to the willingness of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the Transportation Security Agency to admit noncitizens without ID into the country.

“Under current processes, CBP and ICE cannot ensure they are keeping high-risk noncitizens without identification from entering the country. Additionally, TSA cannot ensure its vetting and screening procedures prevent high-risk noncitizens who may pose a threat to the flying public from boarding domestic flights,” the report states.

Federal law deems noncitizens without ID “not admissible into the country” and potentially “subject … to removal from the United States without further hearing or review.” According to Inspector General Joseph V. Cuffari, however, CBP and ICE routinely use the law’s asylum and humanitarian exceptions to offer documentation to noncitizens without ID based solely on “self-reported biographical information.”

Neither agency, the report warned, “could determine how many of the millions of noncitizens seeking entry in the United States each year entered without identification and whose self-reported biographic information was accepted.” (Read more from “IG Report: DHS Admitting Noncitizens Without ID May ‘Increase National Security Risks’” HERE)

Photo credit: Flickr

Pennsylvania Motor Voter System Will Be Audited for Noncitizen Voters

/2 Comments/in , /by

Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro got mixed reviews in September 2023 when he announced Pennsylvania had implemented automatic voter registration for “eligible Commonwealth residents obtaining driver’s licenses and ID cards at Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) driver and photo license centers.”

Before Shapiro switched to automatic voter registration, anyone getting a driver’s license was given the option to register to vote. But now all applying for driver’s licenses are automatically registered and must opt out if they don’t want to be — or cannot be — registered to vote.

Opponents of the move worried that people who are not eligible to vote, such as those who are not citizens of the United States, would not opt out and would be registered anyway.

In Pennsylvania, at least 628,234 noncitizens had a state driver’s license or a non-driver’s license photo identification, according to a Right-to-Know request response obtained by Heather Honey, executive director of the Election Research Institute and co-founder of Verity Vote.

Now an investigation has been announced to look at how the state is keeping illegal voters from registering in the process of getting a driver’s license.

(Read more from “Pennsylvania Motor Voter System Will Be Audited for Noncitizen Voters” HERE)

Jan. 6 Committee Ignores Clear Evidence of Mass Illegal Voting, Systematically Broken Election Laws

/0 Comments/in , /by

In its attempt to blame former President Donald Trump for the crimes committed on January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol, House Democrats have spent the week focused on Trump’s unsupported claims of widespread election fraud. The Jan. 6 select committee and the legacy media outlets promoting the show trial completely ignore, however, the verifiable evidence of systemic violations of election law, illegal voting, and the constitutionally deficient execution of the November 2020 election—including issues Trump challenged following the election.

Georgia provides a peach of an example. President Biden won Georgia and the state’s 16 electoral votes by a margin of 11,779 individual votes, but before the state certified the results of the November 2020 election, Trump challenged the outcome, raising several issues both in and out of court. Trump hammered accusations of fraud in Fulton County, claiming counterfeit ballots secreted in suitcases and vote-flipping by Dominion Voting Systems gave Biden the victory. But Trump also contested the Georgia results based on evidence indicating that tens of thousands of illegal votes were improperly counted.

While Trump’s legal team argued illegal votes in some 30-plus categories were improperly included in the final election tally, violations of Section 21-2-218 of the Georgia election code alone closed the gap between the two presidential candidates. That section provides that state “residents must vote in the county in which they reside, unless they changed their residence within 30 days of the election” and “outside of the 30-day grace period, if people vote in a county in which they no longer reside, ‘their vote in that county would be illegal.’”

Shortly after the November general election, Mark Davis, the president of Data Productions Inc. and an expert in voter data analytics and residency issues, compared voting records obtained from the Georgia secretary of state’s office with the National Change of Address (NCOA) database. After excluding individuals who moved within 30 days of the general election, Davis “identified nearly 35,000 Georgia voters who indicated they had moved from one Georgia county to another, but then voted in the 2020 general election in the county from which they had moved.”

Trump highlighted this evidence during a telephone conversation with Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. His election lawyers, he said, noted from that data they “have actually hard numbers” of tens of thousands of votes that were counted illegally, and that with the margin of victory less than 12,000, “that in and of itself is sufficient to change the results or place the outcome in doubt.” (Read more from “Jan. 6 Committee Ignores Clear Evidence of Mass Illegal Voting, Systematically Broken Election Laws” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Report: Video Coming That Reveals Georgia’s ‘Ballot Traffickers’

/0 Comments/in , , /by

. . .Now comes a charge that the problem could have been even worse: “Ballot traffickers” who traveled the state on election night emptying backpacks stuffed with ballots into drop boxes – all while wearing gloves.

The issue was raised by radio host John Fredericks, who said it was brought to his attention by Heather Mullins from Real Americas Voice. . .

“There are basically about 240 what I’m gonna call ballot traffickers in Georgia. What they did is went around to the drop boxes all over the state with each of them averaging about 24 drop boxes. … They would go there in the middle of the night and empty backpacks with gloves on, into these drop boxes,” he explained.

He said such ballot “harvesting” would be totally illegal in Georgia.

The Gateway Pundit summarized the issue: “The leftist operatives were identified making numerous drops in the middle of the night. they were filmed emptying their backpacks into the drop boxes in the middle of the night. (Read more from “Report: Video Coming That Reveals Georgia’s ‘Ballot Traffickers’” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

‘Unexplained Irregularities’ Found in Large Percentage of Ballots

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A mountainous, 2,600-square-mile region with a population of approximately 119,600 does not seem like your prototypical setting for machine politics. Yet a recent audit of mail-in ballots cast there found irregularities characteristic of larger urban centers — on a level that could have easily swung local elections in 2020, and statewide elections in cycles past. . .

Political leaders and prominent media outlets have dismissed concerns raised by critics that such measures invite voter fraud. But could the election in small-county Missoula call all that into question? . . .

The story at hand begins during the pandemic summer of 2020, when the then-governor, Democrat Steve Bullock, issued a directive permitting counties to conduct the general election fully by mail. In the run-up to the election, a court also struck down Montana’s law aimed at preventing ballot harvesting. . .

Seaman’s office complied with Tschida’s request for access to all of the county’s ballot envelopes, and on Jan. 4 a team of volunteers, overseen by Rhoades, conducted an audit with the assistance of the Missoula County Elections Office. The audit consisted of both a count and review of all ballot envelopes and comparing that to the number of officially recorded votes during the Nov. 3, 2020, general election.

Its conclusions were troubling: 4,592 out of the 72,491 mail-in ballots lacked envelopes— 6.33% of all votes. Without an officially printed envelope with registration information, a voter’s signature, and a postmark indicating whether it was cast on time, election officials cannot verify that a ballot is legitimate. It is against the law to count such votes. (Read more from “‘Unexplained Irregularities’ Found in Large Percentage of Ballots” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE and MeWe HERE

States Can Declare Martial Law on Citizens but Can’t Stop Noncitizens From Voting

/0 Comments/in , /by

A broken clock is right twice a day, but our judiciary is always wrong, as it has perfectly twisted fundamental rights inside out and has flipped state and federal powers upside down.

We have finally discovered a power that the courts feel a state does not have. At a time when states are violating our rights to life, liberty, and property, restricting free movement, regulating interstate commerce and travel, and forming interstate compacts – all against the most basic foundations of our Constitution – the courts have finally stepped in to limit state powers. A federal court has ruled states cannot … ask for proof of citizenship to vote.

On Wednesday, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Kansas cannot require proof of citizenship at voter registration to ensure that noncitizens don’t vote, pursuant to a law duly passed by the state legislature in 2011. The court reiterated a lower court ruling that somehow this violates the phantom Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment and that the state interest does “not justify the burden imposed on the right to vote.” The two judges (the third passed away) concocted their own law that states must first “show that a substantial number of noncitizens registered to vote” before enacting such measures.

To be clear, Kansas was not stripping the vote from anyone eligible to vote and merely required the most basic verification in order to protect the sovereignty of all citizens, as is required for so many other public or private benefits. States have full control over voter qualifications, according to the Constitution, voting is not quite an inalienable right, and the state is enacting the most narrowly tailored act to achieve the vital interest of protecting the franchise.

There is no greater interest in protecting the vote than ensuring noncitizens aren’t voting. This is not some far-flung fear, but a prima facie concern. We have a record level of immigrants in this country, and the motor-voter laws seamlessly register anyone who signs up for a driver’s license with nothing more than a voluntary honor system for immigrants to self-report. If anything, noncitizens are often harmed by weak verification, because some unwittingly sign up to vote and then are subject to deportation for violating federal law.

Yet now an unelected federal judge can crush a basic state power. Keep in mind, it’s insane to suggest that requiring proof of citizenship is a burden, because, by definition, anyone who is a citizen has a birth certificate. This is even less of a “burden” than requiring photo ID at the polls. Although states provide ID for free, there is theoretically a small percentage of people who don’t have ID. However, every citizen has a birth certificate. If they can produce one, there is no burden, and if they are not a citizen, how can they get standing to sue?

Now hold that thought as you watch this video of a Calumet County, Wisconsin, cop following a woman to her home because her child had a playdate in someone else’s house.

“Are you aware that we’re in a stay-at-home order right now?” says the male deputy. “I don’t need to explain that to you? Because I can if you need me to. … Your daughter is going to play at other people’s home and you’re allowing it to happen. … Stop having your kid go by other people’s home.”

Where are the lawsuits? A state can’t protect its vote from foreign nationals, but it can ban citizens from traveling to a neighbor’s home?

Yesterday, a Michigan judge refused to grant relief to plaintiffs who sued the governor’s order that prevented anyone from even visiting family or friends, without large gatherings. Judge Christopher Murray of the Michigan Court of Claims said that even these rights are “subject to reasonable regulation by the state” and that “those liberty interests are, and always have been, subject to society’s interests — society being our fellow residents.”

So, let’s get this straight. A state can’t simply place basic eligibility verification standards on voting or work requirements on Medicaid, but a state can restrict your movement entirely and shut down your way of life entirely. A state can potentially demand that you “show papers” to get approval to walk freely as “an essential worker,” but they can’t ask you to show proof of citizenship when you come to a state office to register to vote.

Where is the federal intervention when it’s actually warranted and actually violates the 14th Amendment? Remember, while extremely important, voting is not a fundamental inalienable right, like earning a living with one’s property and freedom of movement inside this country. Which is why there was a need for the 15th Amendment to ensure voting rights for freed slaves. Where is Attorney General Barr? Don’t just threaten lawsuits, file them immediately!

The 14th Amendment’s Privileges and Immunities Clause authorizes the federal government to enforce fundamental rights against the states violating them. Yet the same judges who fail to recognize these rights create new rights under the Equal Protection Clause.

In fact, Rep. James F. Wilson, R-Iowa, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee back in the 1860s who helped draft the 14th Amendment, spoke emphatically that it was “establishing no new right, declaring no new principle.” “It is not the object of this bill to establish new rights, but to protect and enforce those which belong to every citizen,” declared Wilson in 1866.

These judges only protect the fictitious new rights of criminals and foreign nationals or concoct positive privileges, such as the “right” to ballot-harvest or have six weeks of early voting, but not the foundational rights to exist freely belonging to every citizen.

In the irony of all ironies, the same people who use the Equal Protection Clause to strip states of their basic powers have no problem with states allowing Walmart and Home Depot to remain open with 500 people, but to close a small business that has three people in it. These same people allow dog grooming shops to remain open and snitch on hair stylists who try to open after they are forcibly closed!

But, of course, requiring every voter to show proof of citizenship, something inherently universal among every eligible voter, is unequal!

What’s becoming clear is that the only people with access to the courts now are criminals, illegal aliens, and abortion clinics. We have a country where the basic understanding of a fundamental right has been contorted 180 degrees. Negative, inalienable rights – the right to remain free of government punishment for merely breathing – are crushed with impunity and without due process, while the nonexistent privilege to vote without having to show basic eligibility is now a God-given right.

It’s also evidently a right for insurance companies to get $12 billion in “risk corridors” bailout funding for which Congress explicitly blocked appropriation. The Supreme Court ruled in their favor 8-1 on Monday. So now the Supreme Court appropriates money too?

We have an illegitimate government. Courts insert themselves into everything they have no business adjudicating, yet they are absent in protecting real liberties of individual Americans when they have been attacked more than ever.

As Calvin Coolidge warned on Memorial Day 1927 at Arlington National Cemetery, “The integrity of the Union rests on the Constitution. Unless that great instrument is to be the supreme law of the land, we could have no Union worthy of our consideration.” (For more from the author of “States Can Declare Martial Law on Citizens but Can’t Stop Noncitizens From Voting” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Obama Judge Mandates Spanish-Language Ballots, Marketing, and Assistance in Elections

/0 Comments/in , /by

Teddy Roosevelt might have wished for there to be “room for but one language here, and that is the English language,” but now we have an unelected judge mandating that the states provide multilingual ballots for the core citizenship function of voting, based on his arbitrary standards.

On Friday, Judge Mark Walker of the Northern District of Florida ruled that Florida’s secretary of state must instruct 32 of Florida’s 67 counties to begin providing Spanish-language ballots with endless assistance, marketing, and advertisement, based on his reading of the demographics in those jurisdictions. This same Obama appointee ruled last September that sample ballots in those counties must be printed in Spanish. Now, he has extended that edict to Election Day ballots and marketing and assistance throughout the entire election process.

Even if federal law required what Judge Walker is demanding, it would be an unconstitutional commandeering of a state’s power over election law. Congress only has a small angle to get involved to set a national Election Day (Art. I, §4, cl. 1), and the 15th Amendment ensured that it cannot strip voting rights from freed slaves. Nothing in the text of the 14th or 15th Amendments fundamentally altered this arrangement of states controlling election law. Senator Jacob Howard, one of the prime drafters of the 14th Amendment, made it clear during the floor debate in 1866: “The second section leaves the right to regulate the elective franchise still with the States, and does not meddle with that right.”

Yet Judge Walker contends that section 4(e) of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) compels Florida to provide Spanish-language ballots and endless bilingual marketing and assistance for Puerto Ricans living in Florida (who are deemed automatic citizens). He contends that the law “prohibits English-only elections for those citizens — yes, citizens — educated in Puerto Rico in Spanish.”

For once, the judge is actually correct about the general law but not to the degree he applies it. In 1975, Congress did pass this unfunded liability on the states, at a time when there was only a fraction of the immigrant population we have in the country today. However, section 203 of the VRA only requires bilingual ballots based on census reporting that more than 10,000 individuals or five percent of the population in that county speak a specific language. How can a judge expand this in middle of a decennial census without new data?

Walker claims that section 4(e)(2) requires this result without question because it says that anyone from Puerto Rico, among other places, whose “predominant classroom language was other than English” must not “be denied the right to vote in any Federal, State, or local election because of his inability to read, write, understand, or interpret any matter in the English language.” But nobody is denying their right to vote. Forcing a county to affirmative supply bilingual ballots plus assistance, marketing, and advertising for them is quite a different story from denying them ballots, and such a mandate is only covered with valid census data pursuant to section 203.

The broader issue here is that the Florida government is not even trying to block Spanish-language ballots, and the judge even conceded that “the Governor and Secretary should be lauded for initiating a rulemaking process to ensure compliance.” Walker further admitted that “Plaintiffs conceded that no record evidence exists of a citizen who falls within the ambit of Section 4(e) but who was unable to cast an effective ballot under the protocols established by this Court’s prior preliminary injunction.”

Nonetheless, he says that he is entitled to babysit and intervene in every aspect of the process and order all sorts of processes and funding to be spent for a “toll-free, county-specific, Spanish-language hotline with at least one bilingual employee for the purpose of translating or otherwise assisting Spanish-language voters during all early voting hours, hours when polls are open, and all hours during which voters can cure deficiencies with absentee or provisional ballots following election days, and all business hours on other days.”

Why? Because Walker speculates that perhaps the reason why no Spanish-speaker was denied was “because this Court did not order proactive advertising or marketing regarding the sample ballots,” and thus, presumably, they never knew about the availability of bilingual ballots!

The judge therefore issued 11 orders demanding the secretary of state do everything she can to hire bilingual staff and provide bilingual assistance for every step of the electoral process.

Since when does a court have the power to demand appropriations and policies through a preliminary injunction? Courts have the power to protect individuals from positive action taken against them by the government. They don’t have the power to demand executives take authority or spend money they don’t want to spend, even when the judge is reading the law correctly. And in this case, if the other branches believe this law is unconstitutional, especially this judge’s expansion of it, they have an obligation to only use their resources in concert with the Constitution.

Also, where is the injury-in-fact? Who has been denied the vote? How can a court just order policies like a legislature? Courts are mechanical bodies that simply grant judgement or relief to a plaintiff.

Walker is the same judge who ruled even before Floridians voted to restore voting to felons that the Constitution mandates such a result. Clearly, Walker believes the courts can babysit every aspect of state election law.

There are a couple of other important observations in order:

Why is it that judges rule all the time states can thumb their noses at immigration law and help illegal aliens escape under the notion that ICE detainers unconstitutionally “commandeer” states? This is why some judges have said 8 U.S.C. § 1373 is unconstitutional, even though it requires nothing of the state but not to impede immigration officials’ communication with local law enforcement. Yet, at the same time, nobody has issues with the VRA, which tramples fundamental state powers and places expensive and cumbersome bilingual mandates on them.

Judges like to cite the VRA when it benefits them, but the irony is lost here that section 203 implicitly requires a census to ask the citizenship question because it requires local election jurisdictions to determine whether “more than 5 percent of the citizens of voting age of such State or political subdivision are members of a single language minority.” How could these judges then somehow say the government is downright prohibited from even asking the question on the census form?

How much English proficiency does it take to read the names off the ballot and color in a bubble? If one can’t even recognize the names, then how could he or she vote anyway? Thus, putting current law aside, isn’t it time to affirm our long-standing principles until recently that all official government business should be conducted in English?

Moreover, it’s time to go a step further and codify English as the official language for government business, programs, and grants. Congress should also re-introduce the 1996 bill that passed the House, which would have repealed the requirement to offer bilingual ballots. It should also remove any mandates on the states that either directly force them to cater to the balkanization agenda or open them up to private litigation.

Those who truly support the values of immigration should champion the movement to restore the English language to its proper role in our society, especially as it relates to those who are not just immigrants but have become American citizens. (For more from the author of “Obama Judge Mandates Spanish-Language Ballots, Marketing, and Assistance in Elections” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Judge Demands That Texas Get His Approval to Stop Non-Citizens From Voting

/0 Comments/in , /by

Shouldn’t we all agree that someone’s citizenship should be verified before he or she casts a vote in our elections?

There is no greater interest of a state than protecting the integrity of its franchise from foreign nationals voting in our elections. Yet repeatedly, the federal courts, which have unconstitutionally crowned themselves king over election law, have prevented states from taking any logical measures to stop non-citizens from voting. With the latest court ruling in Texas, conservatives must ask themselves how much longer they will tolerate this judicial tyranny and how many more elections they are willing to lose as a result of our passive approach to the judicial power grab.

Judges have already prevented states from requiring proof of citizenship on the voter registration forms under the motor-voter process. As such, states like Texas are left with the option of retroactively comparing existing voter rolls to citizenship information. Last month, the Texas secretary of state revealed that approximately 95,000 registered voters’ driver’s license information from the motor vehicle department indicate they submitted non-citizen documents. This is a red flag for voter fraud, because while an unknown number of them might later have become naturalized citizens before voting in our elections, it’s unlikely that all of them have become citizens.

To try to determine their status, Texas Secretary of State David Whitley instructed the county clerks to send out letters to these voters and request them to notify the county government if they indeed have become naturalized.

Isn’t that a reasonable request to protect the interests of the state?

In comes an obnoxious judge, Fred Biery, and rules that the state cannot even inquire about someone’s status “without prior approval of the Court with a conclusive showing that the person is ineligible to vote.” He asserted in the four-page order that “there is no widespread voter fraud” that would warrant this process set forth by the state.

These names are not picked out of a hat. There is a conflict between their DMV records, which indicate they are aliens, and their voter registrations, which should indicate they are citizens. Texas is not automatically purging these voters; it is simply asking these people to update their status. Yet Biery said this is too much of a “burden” on potentially naturalized citizens and will “intimidate the less powerful among us.”

Thus, while no judge has officially said “non-citizens shall vote in our elections,” judges have walled off every logical way for states to prevent them from registering and from voting. Judge Biery’s assertion that Texas’s concern is bogus is simply ludicrous. The threat of non-citizens registered to vote is a prima facie problem.

There are record numbers of foreign nationals residing in this country, and that number is growing rapidly, particularly in border states like Texas. There are currently over three million non-citizens in Texas.

The motor-voter law creates a seamless conduit from driver’s licenses to voter registration. All legal immigrants are obviously eligible for driver’s licenses, and in many states, illegal immigrants are eligible too.

There is no front-end requirement to show proof of citizenship for the driver’s license process, and courts have stopped every state that tried to place such a requirement on the voter form from doing so. Additionally, many states are now adopting automatic voter registration of anyone who has a driver’s license. This is actually why the ACLU, of all groups, initially opposed California’s automatic registration law because it would easily ensnare immigrants into the felony of voter fraud and make them deportable.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that we have a smoking gun on non-citizens voting. We essentially have an honor system. For voting. To deny that there is even a problem strong enough to warrant a state “burdening” with an inquiring letter people who got driver’s licenses as immigrants is absurd. My wife had to wait in line for four hours at the DMV this week because of the verification requirements holding up the line, yet somehow, we can’t burden people who are registered in the system as non-citizens to protect the franchise of the citizenry.

The problem is that groups like the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), flush with cash from the Verizon Foundation, are able to lodge one lawsuit after another to stop states from even investigating the extent of the problem.

Worse, LULAC is now suing groups that even try to publish data on non-citizens voting. The group has filed a lawsuit in Virginia against J. Christian Adams and his Public Interest Legal Foundation for simply publishing the data of those non-citizens who were taken off Virginia’s voter rolls.

What is so ludicrous about this case is that the Constitution accords federal judges no power over election law whatsoever. Only Congress can get involved under extraordinary circumstances. Unless an individual citizen is being barred from actually voting, there should be no standing to sue a state’s plenary power of verifying voter registration. If a voter is purged and can’t get back on the rolls and is a citizen, let him sue in court. But judges shouldn’t have control over a general process of notification. Sen. Jacob Howard, one of the prime drafters of the 14th Amendment, made it clear during the floor debate in 1866 over the 14th Amendment: “The second section leaves the right to regulate the elective franchise still with the States, and does not meddle with that right.”

Yet judges all over the country have now assumed control over all aspects of election law, asserting that any effort to combat voter fraud, including photo ID requirements and anti-fraud measures on absentee ballots, are tantamount to stripping voting rights. It took years for Texas to get its photo ID law enacted because of liberal district judges. The state only won in the end because it is under the auspices of the saner Fifth Circuit. States like North Carolina were not as lucky. Now, Judge Biery, a Clinton appointee, is invoking this very clause of the 14th Amendment to block his state from even contacting immigrants registered to vote to make sure they became naturalized as citizens.

Voting, while close to being a fundamental right, is still a product of positive law. States have full control to regulate the process. As Howard said, “The right of suffrage is not, in law, one of the privileges or immunities thus secured by the Constitution. It is merely the creature of law. It has always been regarded in this country as the result of positive local law, not regarded as one of those fundamental rights lying at the basis of all society and without which a people cannot exist except as slaves, subject to a despotism.”

Yet when it comes to unambiguous rights like self-defense, these same liberal judges burden it to the point of non-existence.

Taking a shot at the secretary of state, Judge Biery smugly concluded, “The Court further finds and concludes the Secretary of State, though perhaps unintentionally, created this mess. As Robert Fulghum taught in All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, ‘always put things back where we found them and clean[] up our own messes.’” Perhaps the learned judge should learn another preschool lesson: Namely, don’t grab for yourself something that you don’t have permission to touch. (For more from the author of “Judge Demands That Texas Get His Approval to Stop Non-Citizens From Voting” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

58,000 Noncitizens Illegally Voted in Texas

/0 Comments/in , /by

A yearlong investigation of Texas voter rolls has indicated that about 95,000 non-U.S. citizens might have improperly registered to vote, including about 58,000 who cast a ballot “in one or more Texas elections” since 1996, state officials announced Friday.

In an advisory to county voting officials, Texas Secretary of State David Whitley said his office used newly available data from the Texas Department of Public Safety to identify registered voters who might not be U.S. citizens.

The names were provided to the office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who promised to investigate and prosecute illegal voting activity. . .

Texas law requires registered voters to show one of seven forms of photo ID before casting a ballot: a Texas driver’s license or handgun license, a U.S. passport, U.S. military ID card, U.S. citizenship certificate or a DPS-issued personal ID card or election identification certificate.

Voters without a photo ID can show documents that include their name and address, such as a utility bill or paycheck, and sign a “reasonable impediment declaration” stating that they could not obtain a photo ID because of a lack of transportation, disability, illness, work schedule, family responsibilities, lost or stolen ID or other reasons. (Read more from “58,000 Noncitizens Illegally Voted in Texas” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE