Supreme Court appears ready to uphold Arizona election measures in Voting Rights Act case

The Supreme Court's conservative majority on Tuesday appeared ready to uphold election measures in Arizona that would require election officials to throw away provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct, and limit who can collect absentee ballots for delivery to polling places. The justices heard arguments in the case as dozens of state legislatures consider changes to their election laws, including many that voting rights groups say could curb voter access. Ed O'Keefe reports.

Video Transcript

- The political and legal fight over election laws and the right to vote is getting more intense this morning. Democrats in Congress are pushing one proposal that would affect all Americans, while Republicans are going state by state attacking efforts to make voting easier. Ed O'Keefe is with us now. Ed, good morning to you. So the Supreme Court just heard arguments on some voting restrictions in Arizona?

ED O'KEEFE: That's right, Tony. Lower courts had said that these two laws disproportionately affect voters of color. One of them has to do with provisional ballots that are cast in the wrong precinct, often accidentally. The other has to do with the collection of your absentee ballot. Somebody might pick it up and drop it off at the polling site. Critics call that ballot harvesting. The high court likely going to keep these two laws in place. But the hearing about them revealed one of the reasons why Democrats and Republicans keep fighting over these kinds of laws.

Under questioning from Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the attorney for Arizona Republicans explained part of the reason why they want to keep the laws on the books is pure politics.

MICHAEL CARVIN: It puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Democrats. Politics is a zero-sum game. And every extra vote they get through unlawful interpretations of Section 2 hurts us."

ED O'KEEFE: That zero-sum game appears to be part of what's driving the voting rights debate. In Washington, Democrats controlling the House are pushing through a plan that they say would expand voting rights and establish new national standards for automatic voter registration and how elections are conducted.

ZOE LOFGREN: We can deliver the gold standard of reforms to protect the right of Americans to vote.

ED O'KEEFE: Republicans say it goes too far.

KEVIN MCCARTHY: Under the Constitution, we generally defer to states and counties to run elections. Democrats want to change that.

ED O'KEEFE: But in more than 40 states, Republicans are the ones trying to change election laws, with more than 250 proposals that critics say would curb at least some voter access. In Georgia, there are proposals to limit access to absentee ballots, add ID requirements, and restrict the number of weekend early voting days. Republicans say the changes address unsubstantiated concerns about alleged widespread election fraud.

SHAW BLACKMON: That an integrity of an election is just as important as access to an election.

ED O'KEEFE: Democrats say they would disenfranchise minority voters.

BEE NGUYEN: You are choosing to support a bill that is so egregious that it is nationally known as Jim Crow in a suit and tie.

ED O'KEEFE: So that's in Atlanta down in Georgia. Here in Washington, Democrats today, that bill they're going to pass in the House, it's called the For the People Act. It's going to sail through with just Democratic support, but it's likely dead in the Senate, where it would require Republican support to clear a filibuster. We'll see what happens.

Meanwhile, over at the White House, President Biden has pulled the nomination for his budget chief, Neera Tanden. Withdrew her nomination last night amid bipartisan criticism of, for lack of a better term, mean tweets about members of both parties. The White House says they're going to find something else for her to do instead that doesn't require a Senate confirmation. Tony.

- Yeah, the definition of mean tweets is pretty elastic, given the tweets of the former president. I'm curious, Joe Biden cannot be accused of rushing to remove this nomination. He stuck with it for quite a long time. How come?

ED O'KEEFE: Well, a few reasons. One, they wanted to keep Tanden in place because, you know, she represents some history. She would have been the first Indian-American to hold that job. She's one of the women that they're trying to get nominated to senior posts. The other is that they were under the belief that they could get at least one Republican vote for this, given that at least one Democrat had said they weren't interested in confirming her. But ultimately, the horse trading that was going on, they determined that it just couldn't happen. I suppose the moral of the story is, Tony, just watch your tweets.

- That was exactly what I was going to say, Ed. Well-- well put. All right, thank you very much.

Recommended Stories

  • Former Trump Attorney General Sessions regrets migrant family separations

    Jeff Sessions, the top official behind former President Donald Trump's "zero-tolerance" border strategy, says it was "unfortunate" that migrant children and parents were not reunited quickly after being split apart at the U.S.-Mexico border. Thousands of children were separated from their parents at the border under the 2018 Trump policy, which charged parents with federal immigration offenses and sent them to jails, while children were labeled "unaccompanied" and placed in shelters. In a phone interview on Tuesday, Sessions defended the prosecutions, saying a person traveling with a child "shouldn't be given immunity."

  • Far-right groups like the Proud Boys and the Oath Keepers are splintering and realigning after the Capitol riot, report says

    In the wake of the Capitol riot, far-right groups are in disarray. But new organizations of violent extremists could emerge from the chaos.

  • South Dakota legislative leaders seek to suspend impeachment of attorney general

    Leaders of South Dakota's legislature said on Tuesday they would push to suspend impeachment action against Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg over his conduct in a fatal car crash until criminal charges lodged against him are resolved. Calls for Ravnsborg's ouster mounted last month after state authorities took the extraordinary step of releasing video of police interrogations of the attorney general and other evidence from the Sept. 12 incident, in which his car struck and killed a man walking along a highway. As shown in the video, Ravnsborg told police he believed he had run into a deer, rather than a person, until he returned to the scene the following day to find the body of the victim, 55-year-old Joe Boever, lying in a roadside ditch.

  • Pence breaks silence to condemn Democrats' sweeping voting reform bill

    In some of his most extensive remarks since Jan. 6, former Vice President Mike Pence wrote an op-ed Wednesday condemning House Democrats' sweeping election and anti-corruption proposal as an "unconstitutional power grab" by "leftists."Why it matters: Pence has largely stayed quiet since the Capitol insurrection, during which rioters were heard chanting "hang Mike Pence" after former President Trump promoted the claim that the vice president could block the certification of the Electoral College.Get market news worthy of your time with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free.The big picture: Writing in The Daily Signal, Pence repeated dubious claims that the 2020 election was "marked by significant voting irregularities."Be smart: While some irregularities occur in every election, state and federal officials have vouched for the election's security and integrity.Lawsuits challenging election results have been rejected by courts across the country, including the Supreme Court.What they're saying: "Polling shows that large numbers of Democrats did not trust the outcome of the 2016 election and that large numbers of Republicans still do not trust the outcome of the 2020 election," Pence wrote.Pence called the Democrats' reform bill, which the House will pass on Wednesday, "an unconstitutional, reckless, and anti-democratic bill that ... could permanently damage our republic." "Leftists not only want you powerless at the ballot box," wrote the former vice president, "they want to silence and censor anyone who would dare to criticize their unconstitutional power grab."Details: The Democrats' "For the People Act" first introduced in 2019, has provisions to restore voting rights for felons, expand early and absentee voting, set national standards for early voting and voter registration, allow voters to register online or on Election Day and prevent voter purges.Pence argued that the bill would undercut efforts to reform elections at the state and local levels. He wrote that the bill "mandates the most questionable and abuse-prone election rules nationwide, while banning commonsense measures to detect, deter, and prosecute election fraud."The bottom line: Pence called the events of Jan. 6 "tragic" and said they "deprived the American people of a substantive discussion in Congress about election integrity in America." He did not once mention the name "Trump."Go deeper: Democrats' sweeping reform bill Like this article? Get more from Axios and subscribe to Axios Markets for free.

  • House Republicans jostle over proxy voting after Florida trip

    During a GOP meeting, Texas Rep. Chip Roy called out fellow Republicans who voted “by proxy” against the Democrats’ Covid relief bill last week.

  • Why using reconciliation to pass Biden's COVID-19 stimulus bill violates the original purpose of the process

    Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats meet with reporters before the House voted to pass a $1.9 trillion pandemic relief package on Feb. 26, 2021. AP Photo/J. Scott ApplewhiteReconciliation – it’s a term federal budget experts would understand, but for the rest of us, it sounds like what you do with a family member you haven’t talked to in years. It’s also the process congressional Democrats plan to use to pass President Joe Biden’s US$1.9 trillion COVID-19 rescue and stimulus bill in the Senate. We asked Raymond Scheppach, who is a public policy scholar at the University of Virginia and a former deputy director at the Congressional Budget Office, to describe reconciliation and explain why its use now is causing such controversy. What is reconciliation, and how is it used in Congress? Reconciliation is a legislative process originally intended to reduce federal budget deficits. In 1974, lawmakers decided they had to deal with a recurring problem: If more money was spent than expected or revenues didn’t meet projections, the nation’s deficit grew. But lowering deficits is politically difficult; to do it, Congress needed to either increase revenues, cut spending or both. That usually meant reducing entitlements and other mandatory spending – like nutrition assistance for children – or increasing taxes. So legislators created this process called “reconciliation” that could be used to reconcile actual spending with Congress’ previously adopted spending targets. Here’s the key part that addressed the problems legislators faced when cutting spending or hiking taxes: Budget moves made under reconciliation could not be filibustered. Lawmakers believed this could ease the political difficulty associated with lowering deficits over the long term. An important point: Reconciliation could be used only to change taxes, mandatory spending like farm price supports and entitlements such as Social Security or Medicare. President Joe Biden holds a meeting with business leaders about his COVID-19 bill in the Oval Office of the White House, Feb. 9, 2021. Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images Does using reconciliation for the COVID-19 bill represent a hijacking of the original purpose of the process? It’s important to look back at the 1974 Act to determine the purpose of the reconciliation provision and how it has changed over time. A provision that was created in 1974 to reduce deficits is now being used to do the opposite: dramatically increase deficits. So contrary to reconciliation’s original purpose, it was used for the 2001, 2003 and 2017 tax cuts, which substantially increased deficits. Congress could do that because the restrictions on reconciliation’s use in the Senate have been reduced over time so that now major tax cuts or omnibus spending bills are allowed. It was also inappropriately used to pass modifications to the Affordable Care Act, which significantly increased spending even though it also raised revenues sufficient to offset the spending. Even though it was budget-neutral, it did not reduce the deficit. The $1.9 billion Biden COVID-19 bill would also be an inappropriate use relative to the original intent of the provision, as it would substantially increase the deficit. In 2001, the GOP used reconciliation to push George W. Bush’s tax cuts through Congress. Here, on June 7 of that year, Bush leans over after he dropped a pen as he signed his $1.35 trillion tax cut bill at the White House. AP Photo/Ron Edmonds How often has reconciliation been used? The reconciliation provision has been used by both parties more than 21 times since the 1980s. In some cases, such as the 1990 and 1993 Omnibus Reconciliation Acts, the major purpose was to cut spending and increase revenues. Each of those laws reduced the deficit by a little over $700 billion over five years. For President Biden and the Democrats on Capitol Hill, there are some clear advantages in using the reconciliation process. It would make consideration of the $1.9 trillion bill privileged, in legislative terms. This means that debate can be limited, but most importantly it can’t be filibustered in the Senate, as it requires only 51 rather than 60 votes to pass. As long as all 50 Democrats are willing to vote in favor, then the vice president, also a Democrat, can cast the deciding 51st vote. This process is much more important in the Senate as opposed to the House of Representatives, which has a rules committee that can limit debate and amendments. One fact sheet about reconciliation, produced by the House budget committee in 2020, says “Reconciliation is a tool – a special process – that makes legislation easier to pass in the Senate.” Are there other reasons legislators would want to use reconciliation? Because it requires only a simple majority vote, legislation can be passed relatively quickly under reconciliation’s rules rather than going through a time-consuming negotiation to come up with a bipartisan bill. Since most of the money in President Biden’s bill is for coping with COVID-19 and stabilizing a damaged economy, the administration believes timing is critical. The faster the bill can be enacted, the faster schools can fully reopen, vaccines can be administered and the unemployed will be able to find jobs. Is the COVID-19 stimulus bill the one time we’re likely to see reconciliation used this year? Under the rules, most years there can only be one reconciliation bill. But because it wasn’t used last year, Biden and the Democrats will be able to do two this year. This means that they would be able to use reconciliation for this $1.9 trillion COVID-19 bill and then another reconciliation bill later in the year on climate change or infrastructure or any other major priority. There is no sacrificing other major Democratic priorities if reconciliation is used at this time, which is another political advantage – although using reconciliation to pass these policies would again violate the original intent of the process. Is using reconciliation – devised to avoid political battles – now another form of power politics, ramming legislation through rather than considering the minority’s views? The Senate often operates on historical precedents, and thus the longer-term questions are: What is the effect of using reconciliation on the Senate as an institution? How does it affect the rights of the minority and even democracy itself? Perhaps the most significant negative effect is that it has reduced the rights of the minority party to shape legislation, which often leads to more extreme policies. Participation by the minority party in making legislation often forces policy toward the middle of the political spectrum, where most Americans live. But what we are seeing more often now is that the minority party refuses to engage with the majority party on legislation. That can force the majority to go the route of reconciliation. Yet passing legislation through reconciliation, I believe, exacerbates voter frustration and weakens democracy.This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. Read more:Debunking the myth of legislative gridlockWill the GOP let Congress send money to states and cities reeling from the pandemic? 4 essential reads on the economic crisis

  • Ex-Kansas Rep. Watkins enters diversion over voter fraud

    Former Congressman Steve Watkins of Kansas has entered a diversion program to avoid trial over allegations that he voted illegally in a 2019 municipal election. Watkins, a Republican from Topeka who served only one term in the U.S. House, was facing three felony charges. The Shawnee County district attorney filed the charges just weeks before the August 2020 primary, and Watkins lost to now-Rep. Jake LaTurner.

  • CNN: Pentagon watchdog says Ronny Jackson drank on duty and harassed staff

    Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) allegedly made "sexual and denigrating" comments about a female staffer, drank alcohol and took sleeping medication while working as White House physician, according to an official report obtained by CNN Tuesday night. The big picture: The Department of Defense inspector general's report stems from a years-long investigation into allegations against Jackson of alcohol abuse and overprescription of medication, which Jackson has called "false and fabricated." Get market news worthy of your time with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free.He withdrew his nomination as then-President Trump's nominee for Veterans Affairs secretary in 2018 because of the allegations.Of note: The DoD report was based on White House documents and interviews with 78 witnesses and covers his time as White House physician during the Obama and Trump administrations, per CNN.What they're saying: Jackson, who was elected to the House last November, said in a statement to CNN that Democrats were using the report "to repeat and rehash untrue attacks on my integrity."He told the Texas Tribune he was the "subject of a political hit job" three years ago."Today, a Department of Defense Inspector General report has resurrected those same false allegations from my years with the Obama Administration because I have refused to turn my back on President Trump," Jackson added.Representatives for both Jackson and the inspector general did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment.Editor's note: This a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.More from Axios: Sign up to get the latest market trends with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free

  • 10 hours in Cancún hurt Ted Cruz's job approval more than when he tried to flip the presidential election

    New polling from Morning Consult shows Ted Cruz's job approval fell more after traveling to Mexico than when he objected to the election results.

  • CrossFit condemns Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene for 'loathsome and dangerous lies'

    CrossFit has publicly disavowed Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene over the Republican's previous support for QAnon and other conspiracy theories.

  • 'Unjustified violence': California man files civil rights lawsuit after police ordered dog to 'bite' eight times during 2020 arrest

    A civil rights lawsuit has been filed against the city of Visalia and two officers after a 2020 arrest left a California man with multiple dog bites.

  • Texas ICU nurse weighs in on Texas lifting COVID restrictions: 'I'm scared of what this is going to look like'

    ICU nurse Brittany Smart fears that lifting COVID restrictions amid the emergence of new variables could lead to a greater, and faster, loss of life.

  • The Trump administration reportedly quietly funded Operation Warp Speed with money set aside for hospitals

    By late summer last year, Operation Warp Speed accounts were running dry, so the Trump administration appears to have used a financial maneuver allowing Department of Health and Human Services officials to divert $10 billion from a fund meant to help hospitals and health care providers affected by the coronavirus pandemic, Stat News reports. Congress granted the HHS permission to move pandemic-related money between accounts, though the agreement stipulated the agency had to give lawmakers a heads up. In this case, it appears the HHS siphoned the funds quietly, albeit with permission from its top lawyer. Other attorneys told Stat that the agency likely did have the wiggle room to carry out the action. Former Office of Management and Director Russ Vought defended the decision and said "we would do it again," telling Stat that not only did the administration have the authority, it was also "the right thing to do in order to move as quickly as possible because lives were on the line." Other Trump officials seemed to agree, per Stat, arguing that successful vaccines would reduce hospitalizations, making Warp Speed the more consequential outlet. It's still unclear whether the decision has resulted in less money for health care providers, as the Biden administration remains mum on the subject, Stat reports. Read more at Stat News. More stories from theweek.com7 scathingly funny cartoons about Trump's CPAC appearanceReport: Some Fox News staffers are furious over Kayleigh McEnany joining the networkThe biggest jazz star you've never heard of

  • Feds oppose release of Arizona man who wore horns in riot

    Prosecutors in Washington are opposing the pretrial release of an Arizona man who stormed the U.S. Capitol nearly two months ago while sporting face paint, no shirt and a furry hat with horns. Prosecutors told a judge in a filing Monday that Jacob Chansley should remain jailed until trial because he is a danger to the community, explaining he held a weapon as he confronted officers inside the Capitol, wrote a threatening note to then-Vice President Mike Pence, and spoke about ridding the government of traitors. While prosecutors say the spear attached to a flagpole carried by Chansley into the Capitol was a weapon, his attorney has characterized the spear as an ornament.

  • Tennessee Senate passes bill banning transgender high school athletes from playing sports

    Tennessee is the latest state to pass a bill banning transgender athletes from participating in middle or high school sports that matches their gender identity.

  • A man in New Jersey admitted to working with white supremacists nationwide to destroy properties belonging to Black and Jewish Americans

    Richard Tobin admitted to organizing a "Kristallnacht"-like attack on synagogues and Black Americans' properties nationwide as part of neo-Nazi group.

  • Biden refused to sanction MBS over Khashoggi's murder because he doesn't want his relationship with Saudi Arabia to get worse, officials say

    A US intelligence report released Friday found that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman directly approved the 2018 killing of Jamal Khashoggi.

  • A Proud Boys leader acquired a lookalike's passport to possibly flee the country following Capitol attack, court documents say

    Ethan Nordean told law enforcement officers that the passport belonged to his wife's ex-boyfriend and that she kept the document as a "keepsake."

  • Man who allegedly stole $40k of lottery tickets arrested hiding in back of truck after police foot chase

    A man who stole more than $40,000 worth of lottery tickets has been arrested after being found hiding in the back of a pickup truck following a foot chase by police. The theft of the lottery tickets happened in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, in January 2021 and police put out a public notice on Crime Stoppers with an image of the suspect asking the public to help identify the man, later named as 21-year-old Dylan Barrett, according to the Oklahoma City Police Department (OKCPD).

  • Feds Bust Gun-Crazy Boogaloo Boi Who’s in the U.S. Illegally

    Spencer Platt/GettyDays before the trial of the officer charged with murdering George Floyd is set to begin in Minneapolis, the FBI has arrested a member of the Boogaloo Bois who tried to travel to the city during this summer’s unrest and who has been in contact with a fellow extremist accused of attacking a police station there.Jaap Willem Lijbers, 26, is an undocumented Dutch citizen living in Virginia who investigators have tied to the white nationalist movement that wants to overthrow the U.S. government by inciting a second civil war. He was arrested during a raid on his home in rural Virginia on weapons and immigrations charges.According to a criminal complaint filed March 2 in Virginia federal court, Lijbers was a member of a private Facebook group that included Steven Carrillo, a notorious Boogaloo Boi and Air Force sergeant charged in a series of politically motivated cop killings last June. It says Lijbers had also been in direct contact with Benjamin Ryan Teeter, a North Carolina Boogaloo Boi who in December pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges for attempting to provide material support to Hamas, and with Ivan Harrison Hunter, a Boogaloo Boi from Texas charged with rioting after firing 13 rounds from an AK-47 style assault rifle into a Minneapolis police station during the 2020 civil unrest that followed the death of Floyd while being detained by police.The Boogaloos Are Pitching a Big Tent for Far-Right ViolenceThe term “boogaloo” refers to the title of the 1984 movie “Breakin’ 2: Electric Boogaloo,” to denote a sequel to the American Civil War that ended in 1865. The terminology has evolved over time, and has come to include soundalike words such as “big luau.” Playing off of this, many Boogaloo Bois have adopted the Hawaiian shirt as an unofficial uniform of sorts.Lijbers was first identified in July 2020, following the FBI’s launch of a broader investigation into the Boogaloo Bois “based on information that members were discussing committing crimes of violence and were maintaining an armed presence on the streets of Minneapolis during civil unrest following the death of George Floyd,” the complaint states. Derek Chauvin, the former police officer charged with killing Floyd, is set to go on trial March 8.Using search warrants to subpoena social media records, the complaint states the FBI identified a Facebook account under the name “Marvin Dorner” that had been in contact with Hunter and Teeter. In one series of direct messages, Lijbers—using the Marvin Dorner alias—discussed traveling to Minneapolis during the protests, it says.“I’m personally pissed off about this,” Lijbers wrote.“I’m leaving NC as soon as my guys are assembled,” Teeter responded. “We’re linking up now.”“I’m in southwest Virginia,” replied Lijbers, specifying the town in which he lived as Tazewell, a town of 4,200 people roughly 150 miles from Roanoke. “Where in nc you at? The cops are running out of manpower. And vehicles.”Leaked Chat Logs Reveal Boogaloo Fantasies of Killing Random CiviliansThe complaint says Teeter planned on picking up Lijbers the next day as he swung through Virginia on the way to Minneapolis, but Lijbers apparently got stuck at work. Even though he couldn’t join, Lijbers and Teeter stayed in touch over the following several days, it explains.“Hoodie OVER plate carriers,” Lijbers allegedly advised Teeter, who was by now in Minneapolis. “Do NOT stand out. Appear civilian. Bring marshmellows [sic] for the bonfire and seasoning for the pig roast,” which appear to be references to the “big luau,” a slang term for the second civil war the boogaloo movement is fixated on fomenting.In another, the feds say, Lijbers told Teeter to “get the gov buildings. All of them.” But for all of his apparent enthusiasm, Lijbers still couldn’t get himself to Minneapolis.“I’m still trying to find a ride,” he messaged Teeter on June 1. “All my ‘boogbois’ are chickening out, so it’s just me which I always figured anyways.”Lijbers then “pivoted” to attending a local protest in Virginia a week later, the affidavit says. He had been the only one there armed with a gun, he messaged Hunter, saying that he had “discussed his rifle with one of the police present and that he basically ran security for the event.” He sent Hunter a photograph of himself holding a sign reading: “THE BIG IGLOO BOIS LAUGH IN THE FACE OF TYRANNY,” and followed up with a message that said, “I showed every cop that sign.” In another message, Lijbers sent Hunter a screenshot of a tweet showing him holding a rifle at the rally.Although Lijbers had enough tactical gear to somewhat look the part, his operational security was decidedly amateurish. In a follow-up message to Hunter, Lijbers reportedly said he was going to email him his real name in case something happened to him.“You’re the only one in this country with that info, besides my daughter’s mom,” Lijbers wrote.In August, Lijbers attended another local rally and granted an interview to a local news channel while cradling an assault rifle. Although he is presented as a good ol’ boy of sorts, a hint of Lijbers’ Dutch accent is evident.Two ‘Boogaloo Bois’ Charged With Conspiring to Provide Support to HamasOver the summer, Lijbers’ Facebook page disappeared, according to the FBI. He set up a new one under the name “Jaxson Lynch,” a moniker he also used on Discord, a chat app popular in far-right circles. Following Hunter’s November 2020 arrest, the feds searched his phone’s contact list, which turned up a phone number under the name “jax.” As the feds continued to examine Hunter’s phone, they found a group chat that had been conducted on the Signal app which also linked “jax” with “Marvin Dorner.”A search of public records didn’t identify anyone named Marvin Dorner living in Tazewell and no one named Jaxson Lynch in the area, either. But in January 2021, Facebook records subpoenaed by the FBI led to a break in the case.In analyzing a 2018 group chat that the affidavit says was completely unrelated to the Boogaloo Bois, agents identified one of the participants as a local law enforcement officer. They contacted the unidentified officer, who said that “Marvin Dorner’s” real first name was Jaap. The officer said Jaap was from the Netherlands, and had fathered a child with a woman named in the affidavit as “B.K.” From there, agents were able to track down a post office box B.K. had previously rented and shared with someone named Jaap Willem Lijbers.A further review of Facebook records showed communication between Marvin Dorner and various people with the last name Lijbers. In one message, Dorner referred to having been born in 1994, Jaap Willem Lijbers’ birth year.Agents from Homeland Security Investigations followed up with a check of U.S. immigration records. They discovered a Jaap Willem Lijbers who entered the country on a three-month visitor’s visa in May 2014. Nearly seven years later, Lijbers was himself in the same boat as the undocumented people against whom he and his Boogaloo Boi compatriots have taken up arms.“As of February 8, 2021, Lijbers has never applied for an adjustment to his initial status and no immigration records or applications are identified which would provide Lijbers extended authorization to remain in the United States or preclude his deportation,” the affidavit says.On March 2, federal agents executed a search warrant at Lijbers’ home in Virginia. They seized a Radical Firearms RF-15 military-style rifle along with five magazines, one of which was loaded. Lijbers was arrested and charged with illegal possession of a firearm while being unlawfully present in the United States. A federal magistrate judge ordered Lijbers held without bail. His public defender, Nancy Combs Dickenson-Vicars, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Lijbers is due back in court March 9.Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.