Verified Voting

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could weaken the National Voter Registration Act's 90-day “quiet period”—the federal safeguard that stops states from running systematic voter purge programs in the final stretch before a federal election.

Our President & CEO Pam Smith broke down what’s at stake for Democracy Docket:

“The 90-day quiet period exists because elections require stability, not chaos, in the run-up to Election Day. Congress recognized that if eligible voters are swept up in a large removal program shortly before an election, many won’t have enough time to discover the mistake and get it corrected. Removing the 90-day buffer takes away the only structural safeguard between a bad data match and eligible voters’ ability to participate.”

It’s important to note that the quiet period does not stop election officials from doing their job. As Pam put it, “election officials update them year-round, and individualized changes still happen during the quiet period…”

Read the full explainer:

Explainer: Federal law that protects voters from last-minute removal is at the center of Trump’s anti-voting war If the Supreme Court weakens the quiet period, that protection could be replaced by a dangerous rule under which last-minute purges are barred only when states call them purges.

Our President & CEO, Pam Smith, on the Supreme Court’s upholding state postmark laws in Watson v. Republican National Committee, preserving the ability of election officials in many states to count mail ballots cast and postmarked by Election Day, even if postal delays cause them to arrive shortly after:

“This ruling ensures that a postal delay outside of any voter’s control does not erase a lawfully cast ballot and supports election officials’ ability to capture the will of voters.”

Read the full statement at the link in our comments.