Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Daily Caller

Illegal Aliens Are Registered To Vote — Now What?

Published

6 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

 

By Jason Snead

This week, officials in Oregon announced the state had made a major mistake: Oregon automatically registered 1,259 noncitizens to vote. Last week, Arizona election officials realized they had for years failed to catch a software “coding oversight” that allowed nearly 100,000 people to vote without providing proof of citizenship.

If you are wondering how this could happen, you are not alone. After all, Democrats and most major media outlets spent the last few weeks insisting noncitizens cannot and do not register or vote in American elections. These news stories put the lie to those claims—claims peddled specifically to kill a bill in Congress that would ban noncitizen voting.

That bill, the SAVE Act, is designed to fix problems with federal law that let noncitizens illegally register and vote in federal elections. Speaker Mike Johnson tried to pass it alongside a spending measure, igniting a firestorm of liberal and media misinformation claiming that Republicans are risking a government shutdown over a bill to make it “harder to vote.”

That’s an absurd claim, even by today’s standards. The SAVE Act simply requires that states verify citizenship before allowing someone to register and vote in federal elections. To register, citizens can use the photo ID they use every day to drive, buy a beer or board a plane. Other records would work, too, like naturalization documents or birth certificates. And there are protections for any citizens who have none of these. The only people who would find it hard to vote under the SAVE Act are people who should not be voting at all.

Only progressives can find the controversy in that. The rest of America — nearly 90% of the public — rejects noncitizen voting. That hasn’t stopped Democrats from opposing the bill. When the U.S. House of Representatives passed the SAVE Act earlier this year, just five Democrats voted yes. This time around, the opposition may be unanimous.

Democrats insist that it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote. That’s true. But it is also against the law for anyone to enter the country illegally, and that has not stopped millions — including criminals, rapists and drug traffickers — from crossing our southern border in just the last few years.

Laws only work when they are enforced, and the left has done everything possible to make sure they are not. Liberal lawyers have used the courts to twist federal law into a straitjacket that limits states to simply asking voters to check a box that they are a citizen before registering. When states take action, left-wing groups sue them. Arizonans, for example, had to fight all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to defend a proof of citizenship law after liberal groups filed suit.

Liberals also claim that noncitizen voting never happens, but there are countless documented examples of noncitizens who have registered and cast votes across the country. This year, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose identified nearly 600 noncitizens on the state’s voter rolls, 138 of whom appeared to have cast ballots. Just since 2022, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s administration has removed more than 6,000 noncitizens from state voter rolls. In Texas, the problem is just as severe: Texas Governor Greg Abbott reported removing “over 6,500 potential noncitizens,” including more than 1,900 with voter history.

Clearly, the left knows noncitizen voting happens. For proof, just look to the past. When congressional Democrats crafted HR1, their signature bill to stage a partisan takeover of elections, they included provisions granting amnesty to noncitizens who illegally vote. Fortunately for our Republic, HR1 failed to pass, but Democrats on Capitol Hill have already made it a top priority next year if Vice President Kamala Harris is elected president.

Turning a blind eye to illegal voting is bad enough. What’s worse is that liberal politicians in places like Washington, D.C. and New York are actively pushing for noncitizens to vote. As more cities cave to left-wing activism and allow noncitizens to vote in local elections, there is a growing risk that some noncitizens will slip through the cracks and wind up being given federal ballots. Others can get mistakenly registered due to clerical errors. Refusing to address these problems is an invitation for fraud, but it is also a trap for the unwary. If an unsuspecting noncitizen casts an illegal vote, he is committing a federal crime and could wind up being deported.

Across America, Democrats are fighting to keep it easy for foreigners to register and vote. Even for today’s left, that’s a new low. American elections should be decided by American voters.

Jason Snead is the Executive Director of Honest Elections Project Action.

Before Post

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Daily Caller

US Supreme Court Has Chance To End Climate Lawfare

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

All eyes will be on the Supreme Court later this week when the justices conference on Friday to decide whether to grant a petition for writ of certiorari on a high-stakes climate lawsuit out of Colorado. The case is a part of the long-running lawfare campaign seeking to extract billions of dollars in jury awards from oil companies on claims of nebulous damages caused by carbon emissions.

In Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc., et al. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, major American energy companies are asking the Supreme Court to decide whether federal law precludes state law nuisance claims targeting interstate and global emissions. This comes as the City and County of Boulder, Colo. sued a long list of energy companies under Colorado state nuisance law for alleged impacts from global climate change.

The Colorado Supreme Court allowed a lower state trial court decision to go through, improbably finding that federal law did not preempt state law claims. The central question hangs on whether the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) preempts state common law public nuisance claims related to the regulation of carbon emissions. In this case, as in at least 10 other cases that have been decided in favor of the defendant companies, the CAA clearly does preempt Colorado law. It seems inevitable that the Supreme Court, if it grants the cert petition, would make the same ruling.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

Such a finding by the Supreme Court would reinforce a 2021 ruling by the Second Circuit Appeals Court that also upheld this longstanding principle of federal law. In City of New York v. Chevron Corp. (2021), the Second Circuit ruled that municipalities may not use state tort law to hold multinational companies liable for climate damages, since global warming is a uniquely international concern that touches upon issues of federalism and foreign policy. Consequently, the court called for the explicit application of federal common law, with the CAA granting the Environmental Protection Agency – not federal courts – the authority to regulate domestic greenhouse gas emissions. This Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, should weigh in here and find in the same way.

Boulder-associated attorneys have become increasingly open to acknowledging the judicial lawfare inherent in their case, as they try to supplant federal regulatory jurisdiction with litigation meant to force higher energy prices rise for consumers. David Bookbinder, an environmental lawyer associated with the Boulder legal team, said the quiet part out loud in a recent Federalist Society webinar titled “Can State Courts Set Global Climate Policy. “Tort liability is an indirect carbon tax,” Bookbinder stated plainly. “You sue an oil company, an oil company is liable. The oil company then passes that liability on to the people who are buying its products … The people who buy those products are now going to be paying for the cost imposed by those products.”

Oh.

While Bookbinder recently distanced himself from the case, no notice of withdrawal had appeared in the court’s records as of this writing. Bookbinder also writes that “Gas prices and climate change policy have become political footballs because neither party in Congress has had the courage to stand up to the oil and gas lobby. Both sides fear the spin machine, so consumers get stuck paying the bill.”

Let’s be honest: The “spin machine” works in all directions. Make no mistake about it, consumers are already getting stuck paying the bill related to this long running lawfare campaign even though the defendants have repeatedly been found not to be liable in case after case. The many millions of dollars in needless legal costs sustained by the dozens of defendants named in these cases ultimately get passed to consumers via higher energy costs. This isn’t some evil conspiracy by the oil companies: It is Business Management 101.

Because the climate alarm lobby hasn’t been able to force its long-sought national carbon tax through the legislative process, sympathetic activists and plaintiff firms now pursue this backdoor effort in the nation’s courts. But their problem is that the law on this is crystal clear, and it is long past time for the Supreme Court to step in and put a stop to this serial abuse of the system.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

Trump Orders Review Of Why U.S. Childhood Vaccination Schedule Has More Shots Than Peer Countries

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Emily Kopp

President Donald Trump will direct his top health officials to conduct a systematic review of the childhood vaccinations schedule by reviewing those of other high-income countries and update domestic recommendations if the schedules abroad appear superior, according to a memorandum obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“In January 2025, the United States recommended vaccinating all children for 18 diseases, including COVID-19, making our country a high outlier in the number of vaccinations recommended for all children,” the memo will state. “Study is warranted to ensure that Americans are receiving the best, scientifically-supported medical advice in the world.”

Trump directs the secretary of the Health and Human Services (HHS) and the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to adopt best practices from other countries if deemed more medically sound. The memo cites the contrast between the U.S., which recommends vaccination for 18 diseases, and Denmark, which recommends vaccinations for 10 diseases; Japan, which recommends vaccinations for 14 diseases; and Germany, which recommends vaccinations for 15 diseases.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has long been a critic of the U.S. childhood vaccination schedule.

The Trump Administration ended the blanket recommendation for all children to get annual COVID-19 vaccine boosters in perpetuity. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Commissioner Marty Makary and Chief Medical Officer Vinay Prasad announced in May that the agency would not approve new COVID booster shots for children and healthy non-elderly adults without clinical trials demonstrating the benefit. On Friday, Prasad told his staff at the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research that a review by career staff traced the deaths of 10 children to the COVID vaccine, announced new changes to vaccine regulation, and asked for “introspection.”

Trump’s memo follows a two-day meeting of vaccine advisors to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in which the committee adopted changes to U.S. policy on Hepatitis B vaccination that bring the country’s policy in alignment with 24 peer nations.

Total vaccines in January 2025 before the change in COVID policy. Credit: ACIP

The meeting included a presentation by FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Director Tracy Beth Høeg showing the discordance between the childhood vaccination schedule in the U.S. and those of other developed nations.

“Why are we so different from other developed nations, and is it ethically and scientifically justified?” Høeg asked. “We owe our children science-based recommendations here in the United States.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X