A Wisconsin appeals court put on hold an order to immediately purge over 200,000 names from state voter rolls, giving Democrats a major win as elections draw closer.

This came after Judge Paul Malloy of Ozaukee County last month sided with a conservative law firm that sued the state election commission for failing to follow state law and remove the names of voters who did not respond to an October mailing within 30 days.

But the elections commission deadlocked 3-3 in proceeding with the purge, leading Malloy on Monday to find it and its three Democratic commissioners in contempt. 

Mere hours later, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to take up the case, sending it back to the 4th District of the appeals court. The three judges on the panel — Michael Fitzpatrick, JoAnne Kloppenburg, and Jennifer Nashold — issued the ruling to halt the purge until the legal battle is concluded.

The ruling effectively handed a victory to voter-purge opponents, as there will likely be no resolution, and thus no change to state voter rolls, in time for upcoming elections, which include a February primary for a state Supreme Court seat, a primary in the special election to fill the 7th Congressional District seat, races for various local offices, and the 2020 presidential race.

Rick Esenberg, president of the law firm that brought the case, issued a statement after the ruling that did not address the case directly.

“What is true yesterday is true today,” he said. “The Wisconsin Elections Commission isn’t following state law and we look forward to making that case in the Court of Appeals.”

The firm argued that the election commission broke the law in its failure to act. The commission had sent out a mailing to determine whether voters still reside at the address on file. Wisconsin law gives those receiving the mailing 30 days to reply to avoid having their registration removed to prevent people from registering to vote at more than one address.

As of last month, only 16,500 of those who received the mailings updated their voting address. Over 170,000 did not respond, and the post office was unable to deliver the notifications of 60,000 voters.

Democrats on the commission wanted to wait until after the November general election before removing anyone, citing as cause of concern inaccuracies in a 2017 purge of 343,000 names.

However, even if a voter’s name is removed from the rolls, he can register again later and even at the polls on Election Day if he presents the required documentation.

At the election commission’s Tuesday meeting, Republican commissioners voted to send another mailer to the targeted voters in May, informing them that their registrations would be deactivated in 30 days if they did not respond. The vote deadlocked 3-3, with all Democrats voting against.

“It’s terrible and terribly disgusting the other commissioners won’t do anything to clean up this list,” said commissioner Bob Spindell, a Republican.

Democratic commissioner Mark Thomsen said no removals should be done until next year. “We’re making a mockery of ourselves,” he said of the intended purge.

An analysis by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel found that some of the areas with the highest percentages of voters to be removed would be bastions of Democrat support. Milwaukee and Madison received 23 percent of the mailings. More than half went to individuals and municipalities won by Hillary Clinton in 2016.

With election season on the horizon, the voter fraud battle is in full force. In December, a U.S. District Judge green-lighted a voter purge initiative in Georgia similar to Wisconsin’s, despite opposition from a self-described voter rights group founded by former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams.

“Georgians should not lose their right to vote simply because they have not expressed that right in recent elections,” said Lauren Groh-Wargo of the Abrams-founded Fair Fight Action.

But the judge in that case said that names removed mistakenly can easily and quickly be reinstated.

Also last month, an Obama-appointed federal judge blocked North Carolina’s voter ID mandate. The photo ID requirement is enshrined in North Carolina’s constitution, but opponents of a state law to implement the requirement claimed in a lawsuit that the legislation disproportionately impacts blacks and Latinos.

U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs’ ruling means the requirement will be put on hold until the lawsuit’s resolution unless the injunction is successfully appealed.

Luis Miguel is a writer whose journalistic endeavors shed light on the Deep State, the immigration crisis, and the enemies of freedom. Follow his exploits on Facebook, Twitter, Bitchute, and at luisantoniomiguel.com.