“The Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments on Thursday on the constitutionality of Wisconsin’s exemption from the transparency requirements of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. …
“Assistant Wisconsin Attorney General Brian Keenan argued that applying the same transparency rules to those states would be impractical, since their voter rolls are constantly changing.
“Attorney Andrew Braniff, representing the United States Civil Rights Division, agreed with Keenan and added that it doesn’t make sense to apply other parts of the voter registration act, like the halt on inactive voter purging 90 days before an election, because they can simply re-register when they arrive at the polling place. …
“The nonprofit does not dispute Wisconsin’s exempt status. Instead, it claims that the act’s exemption is facially unconstitutional because it does not apply the same requirements to every single state.
“It asks the court to sever the exception completely or force the federal government to provide justification for the unequal regulation.”
This argument did not fare well during oral argument, according to the news report. Also:
“Whether the panel’s decision will make it to the case’s merits is unclear. The court repeatedly questioned whether the foundation had standing to bring the case at all, since no violation of the voter registration act actually occurred.”