U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles, nominated by President Joe Biden, reported how she would rule in an all-day hearing Thursday on the Justice Department’s decision request to overturn the state’s removal of those voters, citing evidence submitted to the court that some people removed from the rolls were eligible voters.

Giles issued a order which found that the governor’s executive order violated the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. Since Youngkin’s Aug. 7 announcement that the state would make daily updates to voter rolls, more than 1,600 People were disbarred under the program, and the judge banned the program. the restoration of the electoral lists within five days.

Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares issued a statement condemning the court order after the request was “insisted by the Biden-Harris Department of Justice.”

Attorney General Miyares issues statement on court ruling regarding non-citizens registered to vote
It should never be illegal to remove an illegal voter. Yet today, a court – urged by the Biden-Harris Justice Department – ​​ordered Virginia to turn over the names of non-citizens…

– Jason Miyares (@JasonMiyaresVA) October 25, 2024

“The Justice Department launched this shameful, politically motivated operation 25 days before Election Day, challenging a Virginia process signed into law 18 years ago by a Democratic governor and approved by the Justice Department in 2006,” a statement said. declared the Republican attorney general.

Miyares argued that the Biden-Harris administration was trying to “weaponize the legal system against the enemies of so-called progress,” calling the litigation “harassment, pure and simple, and I always stand up to the bullies.”

The state attorney general said Virginia will appeal Giles’ decision “all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary,” and plans are already underway to appeal to the 4th U.S. Court of Appeals. circuit to seek an emergency stay of the district court’s decision. injunction.

The order means that Virginia must send notices to all people whose registration has been canceled under the program, and the notices must clearly state that they are still not eligible to vote if they are not American citizens.

Virginia lawyers asked Giles whether the state would still be required to reinstate a voter’s registration even if officials suspect that person is not a U.S. citizen. Giles said the state program does not provide them with documents such as proof of their citizenship status, adage“I don’t concern myself with beliefs. …I deal with evidence.

But Youngkin challenged the judge’s decision in a statement following his decision, stating: “Nearly all of these individuals had previously submitted immigration documents confirming their non-citizen status, a fact recently verified by federal authorities. »

He argued that his executive order merely enforced a “Virginia law passed in 2006, signed by then-Governor Tim Kaine, that mandates certain procedures for removing non-citizens from the voter rolls, with safeguards in place to affirm citizenship before deportation – and the ultimate security of same-day registration for U.S. citizens wishing to vote provisionally. This law has been applied in every presidential election by both Republicans and Democrats since it was signed into law 18 years ago. »

Former President Donald Trump criticized the judge’s decision in a statement to Truth Social on Friday, saying Youngkin “is absolutely right to appeal this ILLEGAL ORDER, and we hope the United States Supreme Court will remedy it!”

Near the end of the federal district court hearing Thursday, attorneys for the plaintiffs said they were required to submit to Giles an additional USB drive containing evidence from 75 recently registered voters who said their applications had been denied in the framework of the program, highlighting the data as follows. evidence that the program was intended to affect eligible residents who were still trying to vote in elections.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

After hours of argument from state attorneys, the DOJ, and attorneys for plaintiffs who alleged harm caused by the governor’s executive order, Giles seemed convinced that the program violated the NVRA’s requirements against purges. systematic » of the electoral lists 90 days before an election.

State prosecutors argued that the program was not systematic and that anyone informed of voter roll removal would have the opportunity to seek reinstatement.