In 2018, the ideologically split  U.S. Supreme Court upheld the state of Ohio's controversial " Use- it- or- lose it" voting law. The law, in sum and substance, allows the state to strike voters from the registration rolls if they fail to return a mailed address confirmation form, and don't vote for another four years, or in two federal election cycles. The challenge to Ohio's law was brought by Larry Harmon ( a software engineer ), who usually votes only in presidential elections. In 2012, he didn't like the Obama-Mandney choice, so he abstained from voting in the presidential election. And when he went to vote a couple of years later against a ballot initiative about marijuana legalization, he found he was no longer registered. He had been purged from the rolls because he hadn't voted in two consecutive elections, nor had he sent back a postcard the state sent out to confirm that his address had not changed.

QUESTION 

Could the action of the Ohio State legislature be construed as overbroad and government overreach? 

Given that America is the paragon of democracy, was it fair for someone to lose their right to vote simply because they mistook the notice for junk mail and threw it out without even knowing it? 

Would it be plausible to argue that the state's action was a form of "voter suppression"? Finally, should voting in the United States be reduced to a "Use- it- or- lose it" Proposition? What do you think?

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

ANSWER The action of the Ohio State legislature as described could certainly be construed as overbroad and potentially constituting government overrea... View the full answer