They’re asking election administrators to use their data to purge voter registrations, which means names could be removed in a less public process than a formal voter challenge. The strategy could mean electors won’t be summoned in advance to defend their voting rights and the identities of those seeking to purge voters might not be routinely public.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240702113635/https://apnews.com/article/georgia-voter-removal-software-eagleai-266ead9198da7d54421798e8a1577d26

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1515 days ago

    “You have the constitutional right to challenge any other voter in your county,” Frank said at Cherokee County Republican headquarters in Woodstock. “In fact, it’s not merely your right. It’s your duty to clean the voter rolls.”

    Which Constitution says that? Not the US Constitution, the word “challenge” doesn’t appear there at all. And not in the section of the Georgia State constitution regarding voting, either. Is there a secret MAGA Constitution which only they know about, but applies to everyone? That might explain some of the recent SCOTUS shenanigans.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      75
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Supreme Court Justice ducks under the desk with a crayon…

      Oh hey look there it is! Right there in the constitution.

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        505 days ago

        “Talking a lot of shit for someone within Official Act distance” - Joe Biden (in my dreams)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        215 days ago

        You joke, but I have always thought that the reason why the modern Conservative movement leans so heavily on the Founders is that they want to call a constitutional convention to rewrite the whole thing from scratch, and become the new Founders who courts 200+ years from now have to defer to.

        • _haha_oh_wow_
          link
          English
          105 days ago

          That would be a hell of a trick when over 60% of the country doesn’t agree.

            • nocturne
              link
              fedilink
              English
              24 days ago

              And with the way education is going in this country, it will not be long before they can convince everyone that 34 is less than 28.

          • Admiral Patrick
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            60% of the population disagrees, yes. However…

            The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures

            So, 34 red state legislatures can propose an amendment. To be ratified, it requires 3/4 of the states (38 out of 50) to ratify it.

            For either of those steps, I’m not sure if the citizens of those states have any say in the matter or if the legislatures can do it all themselves (plus or minus any veto from the governor of those states or legislative overrides of those).

            So, they need 34 states to propose an amendment and 38 to pass it. As some else in this thread said, they already have 28.

            • _haha_oh_wow_
              link
              English
              145 days ago

              Damn, gerrymandering is dangerous AF

              • Admiral Patrick
                link
                fedilink
                English
                13
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Definitely. But there’s also disproportionate representation at play.

                Let’s say there’s a mass exodus from the shittiest of shithole states leaving only, say, 100 people. For sake of argument, that’s sufficient for the state to continue existing and with a state government.

                That 100 person state still gets two US Senators and (at minimum) one House rep (technically, it retains as many reps as it had as of the last census up until the next census in 2030). It also qualifies to be one of the required 34/38 states to call for a constitutional convention as well as vote to ratify the proposed amendment.

                So, the takeaway is that all elections matter. Get out and vote every opportunity, and vote for sane people who aren’t going to pull this kind of crap.

                if voting wasn’t this important, why do you think they’re working so hard to disenfranchise so many people?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              9
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              Conventions aren’t just for amendments. They can be a vehicle to start over from scratch, just like they did in 1789. Then the only barrier we have is that final 3/4 threshold…

              … But do you really think it will stop if they hold the thing, come out with a new document dominated by red state ideas, and it fails to get enacted? They will view the 13+ states that are not going along as traitors, and our newly minted President-King will do something rash to get the new document approved.

              If a constitutional convention gets called, I fear we’ll end up with a 2-for-1 deal, and those MAGA bastards will finish the job that Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee started.

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 days ago

        ducks under the desk with a crayonsharpie…

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    505 days ago

    I assume they are just going to go by a skin tone chart like in that Family Guy bit.

    • _haha_oh_wow_
      link
      English
      3
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      [paper bag test intensifies]

  • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    445 days ago

    When official means exist to remove non-qualified voters, but groups like this want to circumvent that, it tells you they are acting in bad faith and is the whole reason they don’t want to do it the official/legal way. This should be grounds for election interference, voter fraud, and voter suppression charges.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        34 days ago

        Well, the president can officially send the Seals after them, all enemies foreign and domestic and all that, so that’s the ceiling of responses I guess.