Larry Harman News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

But at the same time places limits on those federally mandated removal programs, including that states may not remove individuals for changed residents unless they fail to respond to a notice and to vote in over two federal elections. I know you have the exceptions clause in b2, would your case have been stronger without the enactment of section b . Without the in other words, could you rely just on a and d . If there was no if there were no b at all . I think certainly i think that if there was no failure to vote clause thats one of the main prohibitions on which theyre relying, i think you have to interpret b in light of d, of course. D clearly indicates that we if so long as we send individuals a notice and so long as we wait two federal elections before we remove them that is acceptable. So why bother because of the except clause . Because you have to interpret the provision b2 the failure to vote clause in the way that uses the failure to vote and only our position interprets b in

United statesSouth dakotaRhode islandAbraham lincolnLarry harmanLong waitEnd useSafe harborSafe harbor provisionPostal serviceService provisionHarbor sideOffice provisionSenate reportSenate report saysOffice notice