- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Federal judge strikes down New Hampshire 'proof of citizenship' law
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:06 pm
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:06 pm
There's only one reason for Democrats to push for this, and that 's because they want illegals to vote in our elections. And they want illegals to vote in our elections because illegals vote overwhelmingly for Democrats because Democrats promise them free tax-payer funded benefits.
MSN
quote:
A federal judge has overturned a New Hampshire law that required unregistered voters to provide proof of citizenship to cast ballots in state elections.
The ruling late Thursday by U.S. District Court judge Samantha Elliott sided with the American Civil Liberties Union and other groups who sued to block the law, saying the requirement for new voters to provide a birth certificate or valid U.S. passport to cast a ballot on election day was unconstitutional.
“New Hampshire’s interest in election integrity cannot justify the burden on New Hampshire voters based on the evidence in this case," Elliot wrote in the 98-page ruling.
Elliot said the state Attorney General's office, which defended the law during a recent trial, didn't provide "conclusive proof" that non-citizens were regularly voting in New Hampshire elections. She pointed to testimony during the trial that only one person in 26 years has been charged with voter fraud, while a few people with permanent resident cards were allowed to vote due to confusion by local clerks.
"Such miniscule numbers strongly undercut any legitimate concern about election integrity vis-à-vis noncitizen voting and, consequently, the state’s interest in addressing it,” Elliott wrote.
The decision, which goes into effect immediately, means New Hampshire voters who arrive at the polls in this fall's midterm elections without a birth certificate or passport will be allowed to use a "legally-binding" affidavit to register to vote and cast a ballot.
MSN
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:10 pm to L.A.
Let’s open up our elections for risk of massive election fraud so we can make it easier for retards, who can’t even figure out how to get an ID, to cast their retarded vote.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:12 pm to L.A.
Judge should be removed and disbarred from ever practicing law.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:12 pm to L.A.
Biden appointed judge, imagine that
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:15 pm to loogaroo
quote:always thought Robert Plant was overrated
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:20 pm to Kafka
quote:Holeey shite! You're right.
Robert Plant
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:21 pm to L.A.
Well then if a Federal Judge has ruled that they can supercede state election law, sounds like we can have the executive branch of the federal govt enforce the rules of the SAVE act. Hoohah 
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:27 pm to L.A.
There is one and only one valid reason to oppose voter ID.
To CHEAT. You can't hate liberals enough. And it's deserved hate. Besides, they hate us more.
To CHEAT. You can't hate liberals enough. And it's deserved hate. Besides, they hate us more.
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:30 pm to L.A.
That'll get tossed on Appeal. States have explicit rights in managing elections. Local, State, and Federal
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:32 pm to L.A.
This shite is so obvious. The Marxist judges are doing everything possible to slow down Trump's efforts. I'm sure this will be appealed all the way to SCOTUS. A person must be a citizen in order to vote in federal elections. What other way possible is there for a person to prove citizenship?
Posted on 5/30/26 at 2:33 pm to L.A.
Good……..
So now we go down the legal process pathway and end up in Supreme Court and get it mandated everywhere
So now we go down the legal process pathway and end up in Supreme Court and get it mandated everywhere
Posted on 5/30/26 at 3:39 pm to L.A.
quote:
"Such miniscule numbers strongly undercut any legitimate concern about election integrity vis-à-vis noncitizen voting and, consequently, the state’s interest in addressing it,” Elliott wrote.
How many audits have they done to verify that all voters were citizens? Is the judge okay if, going forward, the state does a thorough audit after the fact, to verify citizenship of everyone who voted? Or is this one of those "don't ask, don't tell" situations, where we just make an assumption that the number is miniscule because a judge says it's miniscule.
This post was edited on 5/30/26 at 3:40 pm
Posted on 5/30/26 at 4:30 pm to L.A.
quote:
didn't provide "conclusive proof" that non-citizens were regularly voting in New Hampshire elections.
I wasn't aware laws had a threshold where a certain amount of infractions against it must occur before it can be considered constitutional.
Is this new?
Posted on 5/30/26 at 4:43 pm to L.A.
That will get overturned above this judge.
Popular
Back to top


14








