you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 8 points 5 days ago (3 children)

UCLA already reviewed about 9k. 20 were confirmed citizens and the rest are made up name not even living in the state.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 days ago (2 children)

    Do you have a source for that?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    I saw it on Ground news. I'll try to find it again.

    Interestingly why searching, I'm seeing new articles about the DOJ suing UCLA.

    Edit: here's the link if you have ground news or use the free version. Link

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 5 days ago

    Thank you. I think people are getting the wrong impression. I'm quoting the Mother Jones article:

    Two data analysts at the University of California, Los Angeles’ Voting Rights Project found that over 40 percent of the people the Department of Justice has deemed likely noncitizens were not even on the state’s voter rolls in the first place, and many others are likely legally eligible to vote.

    It's saying that 40% of the noncitizens were either not registered in the first place (thus would not be able to vote) or were legally eligible to vote.

    In a Tuesday hearing, the Justice Department told a federal judge that it created its entire list by checking a commercially-bought dataset containing partial California voter rolls against a government list of people who had been assigned numbers in the federal immigration system.

    But just because someone is in the immigration system does not mean they are not a US citizen. If they have completed the naturalization process, they are citizens.

    I don't see anything about made-up names or people living out of state voting in California.

  • source
  • parent