Connect with us

Ohio

Voting rights groups worry Ohio's July voter registration removals may violate federal law • Ohio Capital Journal

Published

on

Voting rights groups worry Ohio's July voter registration removals may violate federal law • Ohio Capital Journal


The Brennan Center for Justice and the Ohio Organizing Collaborative have been pushing Ohio’s Secretary of State since July to confirm voters aren’t being improperly removed from the rolls after updating their address. Now, they’re preparing to file suit against Sec. Frank LaRose if his office doesn’t respond by the end of the day today, Wednesday.

They argue Ohio’s procedures seem as though they violate federal law, and new state provisions seem to confirm those concerns.

Where statutes disagree

The watchdogs’ concerns center on provisions in the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, known colloquially as the Motor Voter law. In addition to requiring state motor vehicle agencies to provide voter registration forms, it sets out guidelines for what happens when a resident updates their address.

Section 5 requires that whenever someone updates their address with the BMV, that change must also serve as notification to update their voter registration. This change is supposed to happen automatically unless the person affirmatively opts out of the process.

Advertisement

“In other words,” the organizations wrote to the Secretary in July, “the NVRA puts the onus on state officials to update the voter’s registration record.”

In the same letter they cite correspondence between the Secretary’s office and state Rep. Elliot Forhan, D-South Euclid, in which LaRose indicated at least some of the individuals getting flagged had moved and updated their driver’s license but failed to update their registration.

The Brennan Center and Ohio Organizing Collaborative argue that’s a fundamental misreading of state agency responsibilities under the Motor Voter law.

“Ohio cannot require registered voters who report a change of address at the BMV to take any additional steps to update their registration, such as filling out additional forms or cancelling the registration at their old address,” their letter insists.

One notable problem, Brennan Center attorney Patrick Berry argued, is Ohio’s DATA Act. The measure was a priority for LaRose early in the current legislative term and it was included as a budget rider last summer. Its primary purpose was to get Ohio’s 88 boards of elections on the same page when it comes to maintaining their voter rolls, but it also carries a provision that could hamper updates under the NVRA.

Advertisement

The statute states registration updates can only happen if a voter files a name or address change, but it also prohibits information obtained from state agencies in the normal course of business from being used to update a voter’s registration address.

Berry worries that presents a conundrum. Is a change of address form getting shared between agencies to keep records up to date as the Motor Voter law requires? Or is it treated as the information collected in the normal course of business that can’t be used to update registrations?

With state law potentially at cross purposes, the organizations warned the Secretary that “removal on the ground that (voters) failed to cancel their registration at their old address would violate the NVRA.”

Additionally, Berry expressed concerns about the BMV change of address form. While it notifies applicants that the information they share will be used for “voter registration purposes,” it’s presented more like a warning than a service. “By signing this form,” it states, “you are consenting to the release of the information provided.”

“We think that that language could be confusing and subject to different interpretations,” Berry argued.

Advertisement

Following that notification, the form includes a box for applicants to opt out of sharing their information, but it also includes a second signature box. In a follow up letter to the Secretary on Monday, the organizations criticized that framing as “facially deceptive” because it seemingly presents the information sharing as something to which a voter must “opt in.”

Are the right people getting flagged?

After an initial review of the voters included in the removal process, Berry noted they found “a handful” who received letters to verify their address well before state officials can actually remove them. That’s not necessarily a problem, but he explained the Motor Voter law established the procedures for removing a voter after they’ve moved.

“Specifically,” he said, “an election official can’t remove a voter based on a change of address unless the voter confirms themselves in writing that they’ve moved, or the voter fails to respond to the notice that’s sent to them and then fails to vote in the next two federal general elections.”

Berry described finding voters in Cuyahoga County scheduled for removal who received confirmation letters in 2021, 2022 or 2024 — too recent to remove them unless the voter responds confirming their move.

After the removals went forward at the end of July, Berry explained one of the voters they identified was removed but the remainder were still on the rolls. The voter who was removed may have returned a confirmation notice, but it’s not clear.

Advertisement

“And we just want to make sure that you know that one voter who was removed was removed properly and in accordance with the National Voter Registration Act,” Berry said.

He noted they also want to know if similarly situated voters are being protected as well.

“As the chief election official,” Berry explained, “Secretary LaRose is required to ensure that the relevant state agencies and election officials, including the Bureau of Motor Vehicles and county boards of elections, are complying with the National Voter Registration Act.”

“And we hope that he responds to our letter by tomorrow, with assurances that they are,” he added. “But if we don’t hear from the Secretary, we won’t hesitate to seek court intervention to protect the rights of Ohio voters.”

Follow OCJ Reporter Nick Evans on Twitter.

Advertisement

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement





Source link

Ohio

Protesters blast music outside Columbus hotel where ICE was staying

Published

on

Protesters blast music outside Columbus hotel where ICE was staying


play

  • Protesters gathered outside a Columbus-area hotel to disrupt U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials staying there.
  • Police were called to the Embassy Suites on Dec. 19 due to noise complaints from the demonstration.
  • The protest, which included loud music, followed several days of reported ICE activity in the Columbus area.
  • A hotel employee confirmed ICE officials were guests and that some other guests received refunds due to the disturbance.

Dozens of people gathered in below freezing temperatures Friday night, Dec. 19, to protest U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement officials’ presence in Columbus.

Protesters discovered where ICE officials were staying locally and showed up outside their hotel to blast music and disrupt their sleep, according to reports from social media, a witness, police and a hotel employee.

Advertisement

The music, mostly electronic dance music with heavy beats, began around 9 p.m. and didn’t cease for hours, said Brandon Baker, 36, who happened upon the scene after hearing and seeing activity.

He took a video and posted it on Facebook as he stood outside the Embassy Suites hotel on Corporate Exchange Drive on the Northeast Side near Westerville around 9:30 p.m.

“It’s important to recognize that Columbus is a melting pot and we’re not going to tolerate this kind of intolerance,” Baker said, of why he posted the video. He was also hoping more people might come.

In the nearly hour he was on scene, Baker said he saw approximately 50 people gathered outside grow to a group closer to 150. There were also people in parked cars honking their horns and five to seven police cars there, though he said police weren’t interacting with protesters. He also witnessed people leaving the hotel.

Advertisement

Columbus police said they were called around 9:20 p.m. on Dec. 19 due to noise complaints, but said there was no further information.

The protest followed several reports of increased ICE activity and arrests Dec. 17, 18 and 19 in Columbus, as well as a small group protest outside the Westerville ICE office earlier on Friday.

The increased ICE activity prompted responses from city officials, advocates and more earlier in the week. The response included Columbus Mayor Andrew Ginther and Columbus police Chief Elaine Bryant saying no city resources would be used to help federal agents in immigration enforcement operations.

“It was a good symbol and a good thing to see Columbus kind of fighting back against this group of indivdiuals who have pretty much taken it upon themselves to terrorize people,” Baker said of the protest. “If we’re so anti-terrorism in the United States, why are we allowing something like this to even happen?”

Advertisement

On Dec. 18, an ICE spokesperson said in a prepared release: “ICE officers continue to arrest criminal illegal aliens and immigration violators in the city of Columbus, across Ohio, and throughout the United States.”

“These enforcement actions are part of ongoing efforts to uphold public safety and enforce federal immigration laws,” the statement said.

Some advocates said they feared the increased activity in Columbus in the past few days – including an estimated 15 to 20 arrests each day on Dec. 17 and Dec. 18 – might be the beginning of raids in other U.S. cities. In Chicago, ICE’s “Operation Midway Blitz” ended with 1,600 to 1,900 people arrested beginning in September, according to news reports.

The hotel had to refund at least a few guests, a hotel employee said. He confirmed ICE was staying at the hotel, but emphasized they are open to the public and do not have control over who stays there.

Baker’s video pans as someone states that people are blaring music outside the hotel to keep ICE awake.

Advertisement

“Everyone was doing everything they could to make noise,” Baker said. “The idea is to play the music and stuff as loud as possible to keep them from sleeping.”

It appeared that the music was coming from a bus with speakers attached, Baker said, but people were also playing trombones and trumpets and ringing cow bells.

People Baker spoke to said they were trying to “drown” out ICE and get them to leave.

“Columbus is done with this,” Baker said.

Advertisement

Underserved Communities Reporter Danae King can be reached at dking@dispatch.com or on X at @DanaeKing.



Source link

Continue Reading

Ohio

$50K Powerball ticket sold in Northeast Ohio; jackpot reaches $1.5B

Published

on

K Powerball ticket sold in Northeast Ohio; jackpot reaches .5B


CANFIELD, Ohio (WJW) – Nobody took home the massive Powerball jackpot on Wednesday, but one Canfield man is still celebrating after purchasing a winning ticket worth $50,000.

According to Ohio Lottery, Bryan decided to try his luck after realizing the Powerball jackpot was over $1 billion. He bought a ticket from the Meijer grocery store on Boardman-Canfield Road in Boardman.

The next morning, Bryan woke up and checked the ticket, stunned to discover that he won $50,000.

After mandatory state and federal taxes, the lucky winner will take home more than $36,000.

Advertisement

Bryan told lottery officials that he doesn’t have specific plans for money yet, but the big win will certainly make for “a very good Christmas.”

It has been months since someone won the Powerball jackpot, which now sits at a massive $1.5 billion. There is also a cash option worth $689.3 million up for grabs.

The next drawing will be Saturday night at 11 p.m. Learn more about the Powerball right here.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Ohio

After her son died in car wreck, Ohio mom fought for public records

Published

on

After her son died in car wreck, Ohio mom fought for public records


A mom searching for answers about her son’s death in a car wreck won a victory on Dec. 19 when the Ohio Supreme Court ordered the Richland County Sheriff to release records to her.

The court ruled in a unanimous decision that Andrea Mauk is entitled to three sets of records withheld by the sheriff, with only Social Security numbers being redacted. Mauk will be awarded $2,000 in damages but will not receive attorney fees.

On June 23, 2023, 18-year-old Damon Mauk lost control of his 1998 Ford Mustang and slammed it into a tree. His mother wanted to piece together what happened, collect his belongings and grieve the loss of her child. She didn’t think she’d have to fight for public records and take her case to the Ohio Supreme Court.

Following the crash, Richland County Sheriff’s deputies, a township fire department and the Ohio State Highway Patrol responded.

Advertisement

During the investigation, a trooper told a deputy to leave Damon’s iPhone and wallet in the car, according to Mauk’s court filings. Instead, the deputy took the belongings to the hospital and handed them off to someone who said he was Damon’s dad.

Mauk didn’t understand. Damon’s father was largely absent from his life. How could he have been there to pick up the wallet and phone?

A few weeks after the fatal crash, Mauk asked for records, including: the sheriff’s report and inventory of items taken from the car, body camera footage from deputies who gave away the belongings, the report, photos and videos created by the patrol and more.

Mauk, of the Mansfield area, received some but not all of the requested records. Mauk hired attorney Brian Bardwell to pursue records she believes exist but weren’t provided or were improperly redacted.

Advertisement

The sheriff’s office claimed that some of the requested records were exempt from disclosure because they are confidential law enforcement records or personal notes. The court privately reviewed the records withheld from Mauk and determined that they should be released.

The decision in favor of releasing records runs contrary to recent rulings from the high court.

In 2024, the court held that the cost of sending troopers to protect Gov. Mike DeWine at a Super Bowl game weren’t subject to disclosure and that the Ohio Department of Health should redact from a database the names and addresses of Ohioans who had died, even though that death certificate information can be released on an individual case basis.

In 2025 the court ruled that police officers’ names may be kept confidential if they’re attacked on the job, giving them privacy rights afforded to crime victims.

Advertisement

State government reporter Laura Bischoff can be reached at lbischoff@usatodayco.com and @lbischoff on X.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending