Non-citizen suffrage in the United States has been greatly reduced over time and historically has been a contentious issue. [1] [2]
Before 1926, as many as 40 states allowed non-citizens to vote in elections, usually with a residency requirement ranging from a few months to a few years. [3] [4] While federal law does not prohibit noncitizens from voting in state or local elections, no state has allowed noncitizens to vote in statewide elections since Arkansas became the last state to outlaw noncitizen voting in state elections in 1926. [5]
Since 1997, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 has prohibited non-citizens from voting in federal elections, with the threat of fines, imprisonment, inadmissibility and deportation. [6] [7] [8] Exempt from punishment is any noncitizen who, at the time of voting, had two natural or adoptive U.S. citizen parents, who began permanently living in the United States before turning 16 years old, and who reasonably believed that they were a citizen of the United States. [6]
As of December 2022, non-citizen voting is allowed for a handful of local elections, including in Winooski and Montpelier in Vermont, and in eleven cities in Maryland near Washington, D.C. [10] In 2023, D.C. itself started allowing local non-citizen voting. Additionally, the U.S. territories of American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands allow non-citizen US nationals to vote, a status granted to all persons born in American Samoa. [11] [12] All persons born in the Northern Mariana Islands automatically become US citizens at birth, as opposed to becoming US nationals at birth. Guam and Hawaiʻi, by contrast, do not allow non-citizen US nationals to vote. Turnout by non-citizens in many of these cities remains very low (sometimes less than 0.5% of voters), with some non-citizens expressing fear about the spotlight and backlash around how voting might hurt their application to become citizens. [13]
In 2006, San Francisco State University political science professor and rights activist Ron Hayduk published a book entitled Democracy For All: Restoring Immigrant Voting Rights in the United States. The book presents additional elements of the historical and present reality of noncitizen voting rights in the United States. [4]
U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin has argued that the blanket exclusion of noncitizens from the ballot is neither constitutionally required nor historically normal. [14]
In 2017, journalist Joe Matthews called for universal suffrage in California. [15] [ importance? ]
While initial research showed that 22 states or territories, including colonies before the Declaration of Independence, have at some time given at least some voting rights to non-citizens in some or all elections, [14] [4] more recent and in-depth studies uncovered evidence of 40 states providing suffrage for non-citizens at some point before 1926. [3] For example, in 1875, the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett noted that "citizenship has not in all cases been made a condition precedent to the enjoyment of the right of suffrage. Thus, in Missouri, persons of foreign birth, who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, may under certain circumstances vote." [16]
By 1900, nearly half of the states and territories had some experience with voting by non-citizens, and for some the experience lasted more than half a century. [17] At the turn of the twentieth century, anti-immigration feeling ran high, and Alabama stopped allowing non-citizens to vote by way of a constitutional change in 1901; Colorado followed suit in 1902, Wisconsin in 1908, and Oregon in 1914. [18] Just as the nationalism unleashed by the War of 1812 helped to reverse the non-citizen suffrage policies inherited from the late eighteenth century, World War I caused a sweeping retreat from the progressive non-citizen suffrage policies of the late nineteenth century. [19] In 1918, Kansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota all changed their constitutions to purge non-citizen suffrage, and Texas ended the practice of noncitizen voting in primary elections by statute. [18] Indiana and Texas joined the trend in 1921, followed by Mississippi in 1924 and, finally, Arkansas in 1926. [20] In 1931, political scientist Leon Aylsworth noted that "[f]or the first time in over a hundred years, a national election was held in 1928 in which no alien in any state had the right to cast a vote for a candidate for any office – national, state, or local." [21]
1776–1819 [4]
1776–1831 [4]
1789–1799 [4]
1776–1851 [4]
1792–1814 [4]
1776–1820 [4]
1777 New York State Constitution, Article VII: "[E]very male inhabitant of full age, who shall have personally resided within one of the counties of this State for six months immediately preceding the day of election, shall, at such election, be entitled to vote for representatives of the said county in assembly; if, during the time aforesaid, he shall have been a freeholder, possessing a freehold of the value of twenty pounds, within the said county, or have rented a tenement therein of the yearly value of forty shillings, and been rated and actually paid taxes to this State: Provided always, That every person who now is a freeman of the city of Albany, or who was made a freeman of the city of New York on or before the fourteenth day of October, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, and shall be actually and usually resident in the said cities, respectively, shall be entitled to vote for representatives in assembly within his said place of residence." [23]
1776–1804 [4]
1704–1856 [4]
1787 Northwest Ordinance (valid until 1803) "Provided, That no person be eligible or qualified to act as a representative unless he shall have been a citizen of one of the United States three years, and be a resident in the district, or unless he shall have resided in the district three years; and, in either case, shall likewise hold in his own right, in fee simple, two hundred acres of land within the same; Provided, also, That a freehold in 50 acres (200,000 m2) of land in the district, having been a citizen of one of the states, and being resident in the district, or the like freehold and two years residence in the district, shall be necessary to qualify a man as an elector of a representative." [24]
1762–1842 [4]
1790–? [4]
1796–1834 [4]
1876–1902 [4]
1863–1890 [4]
1879–? [4]
1865–1921 [4]
1864–1889 [4]
1854–1918 [4]
1848–1864 [4]
1889-1889/1909 [4]
1850–1907 [4]
1848–1914 [4]
1850–1918 [4]
(1853–1889)
(1850–1889)
Unlike the United States's other self-governing territories, American Samoa, an unincorporated, unorganized territory of the United States since 1900, has not been given jus soli birthright citizenship either by incorporation or act of Congress for those born in its borders. As a result, people born in American Samoa or any United States Minor Outlying Islands are not given automatic US citizenship but have instead been given US nationality without citizenship. [48] [49] [50]
Residents of the Northern Mariana Islands gained automatic US citizenship via the Covenant with the United States in November 1986, but also have the option (prior to reaching the age of 18) to reject US citizenship and accept non-citizen US nationality instead. [51]
Under American Samoa law and Northern Mariana Islands law, both US citizens and non-citizen nationals may register to vote, [11] [12] [ non-primary source needed ] making them the only jurisdictions at the state or territorial level that allow non-citizens to vote and making their delegates the only members of Congress voted for by non-citizens (though those members cannot themselves vote in Congress, because territories are not represented there in the Constitution).
Turnout by non-citizens has been very low (sometimes less than 0.5% of voters) in cities where non-citizen voting is legal only for some local elections, with some non-citizens expressing fear that about the spotlight and backlash and fear around how voting might hurt their application to become citizens. [13]
Non-citizen voting for anyone residing in the District at least 30 days was enacted on February 23, 2023. [52] [53] Non-citizen residents of DC may vote in local matters (such as mayor or referendums) but they may not vote in federal elections (such as US president or DC's house delegate). [54] As of April 30, 2024, out of 450,070 registered voters, 372 were noncitizens. [55]
Maryland ended noncitizen voting rights for state and federal elections in 1851, but its constitution recognizes the autonomy of local municipalities and localities on the subject. Localities with non-citizen voting in local elections include:
In November 2016 voters in San Francisco approved a proposal to allow just the parents of children in the San Francisco school system to vote in school board elections regardless of their immigration or citizenship status. [67] 65 non-citizen parents registered for the 2018 election, 36 parents registered for 2020, and 74 parents registered for the 2022 election. [68] Voters rejected similar proposals in 2004 and 2010. [69] It only applies to school board elections. [70]
On July 29, 2022, ordinance 206-21, which allowed noncitizens to vote in San Francisco school board elections, was struck down before being upheld in August 2023 along with a similar measure in Oakland. [71]
Montpelier citizens passed a charter change on November 6, 2018 that would afford full voting rights in municipal elections to any legal non-citizens residing in the city. [72] A similar proposal in Winooski passed in 2020. [73] Approval for all localities was granted by the Vermont state legislature in June 2021, overriding the veto of Governor Phil Scott. [74]
Cambridge approved the right of non-citizens to vote in local elections in 2000, but still needs the state to sign-off on the measure. [75]
The city of Yellow Springs passed a law by referendum in 2019, allowing non-citizens to vote in local elections. This was disallowed by Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose on the grounds that it was unconstitutional. [76] [77] The Ohio constitution was amended in 2022 to specifically exclude non-citizens from voting. [78]
In New York City, noncitizens who have children in public schools could vote in school board elections until 2002 when officials abolished school boards. [79] In 2021, New York City passed a law allowing legal immigrants the right to vote in city and borough elections. [79] This law was struck down in June 2022 as violating the New York State constitution, preventing it from going into effect. [80] An appeals court upheld that decision in February 2024, though the city planned to appeal further. [81] Previously, bills had been submitted at the New York City Council and at the New York State Assembly in 2003, 2005, 2006 and 2010. [82]
As of October 10, 2023, seven state constitutions explicitly require citizenship for voting:
The Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the federal government and each state from denying or abridging a citizen's right to vote "on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude." It was ratified on February 3, 1870, as the third and last of the Reconstruction Amendments.
The Twenty-third Amendment to the United States Constitution extends the right to participate in presidential elections to the District of Columbia. The amendment grants to the district electors in the Electoral College, as though it were a state, though the district can never have more electors than the least-populous state. How the electors are appointed is to be determined by Congress. The Twenty-third Amendment was proposed by the 86th Congress on June 16, 1960; it was ratified by the requisite number of states on March 29, 1961.
Suffrage, political franchise, or simply franchise is the right to vote in public, political elections and referendums. In some languages, and occasionally in English, the right to vote is called active suffrage, as distinct from passive suffrage, which is the right to stand for election. The combination of active and passive suffrage is sometimes called full suffrage.
Disfranchisement, also disenfranchisement or voter disqualification, is the restriction of suffrage of a person or group of people, or a practice that has the effect of preventing someone from exercising the right to vote. Disfranchisement can also refer to the revocation of power or control of a particular individual, community, or being to the natural amenity they have; that is to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right, of some privilege or inherent immunity. Disfranchisement may be accomplished explicitly by law or implicitly through requirements applied in a discriminatory fashion, through intimidation, or by placing unreasonable requirements on voters for registration or voting. High barriers to entry to the political competition can disenfranchise political movements.
Guinn v. United States, 238 U.S. 347 (1915), was a United States Supreme Court decision that found certain grandfather clause exemptions to literacy tests for voting rights to be unconstitutional. Though these grandfather clauses were superficially race-neutral, they were designed to protect the voting rights of illiterate white voters while disenfranchising black voters.
Universal suffrage or universal franchise ensures the right to vote for as many people bound by a government's laws as possible, as supported by the "one person, one vote" principle. For many, the term universal suffrage assumes the exclusion of the young and non-citizens. At the same time, some insist that more inclusion is needed before suffrage can be truly universal. Democratic theorists, especially those hoping to achieve more universal suffrage, support presumptive inclusion, where the legal system would protect the voting rights of all subjects unless the government can clearly prove that disenfranchisement is necessary. Universal full suffrage includes both the right to vote, also called active suffrage, and the right to be elected, also called passive suffrage.
Voting rights, specifically enfranchisement and disenfranchisement of different groups, have been a moral and political issue throughout United States history.
Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1875), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that citizenship does not confer a right to vote, and therefore state laws barring women from voting are constitutionally valid. The Supreme Court upheld state court decisions in Missouri, which had refused to register a woman as a lawful voter because that state's laws allowed only men to vote.
The Constitution of the State of Michigan is the governing document of the U.S. state of Michigan. It describes the structure and function of the state's government.
Non-citizen suffrage is the extension of the right to vote (suffrage) to non-citizens. This right varies widely by place in terms of which non-citizens are allowed to vote and in which elections, though there has been a trend over the last 30 years to enfranchise more non-citizens, especially in Europe.
Originally, the state of New Jersey was a single British colony, the Province of New Jersey. After the English Civil War, Charles II assigned New Jersey as a proprietary colony to be held jointly by Sir George Carteret and John Berkeley, 1st Baron Berkeley of Stratton. Eventually, the collection of land fees, or quit-rents, from colonists proved inadequate for colonial profitability. Sir George Carteret sold his share of the colony to the Quakers in 1673. Following the sale, the land was divided into East and West Jersey. In 1681, West Jersey adopted a constitution. In 1683, East Jersey adopted one as well. In 1702, the colonies were united again under Anne, Queen of Great Britain, and adopted a constitution in 1776.
The voting rights of Indigenous Australians became an issue from the mid-19th century, when responsible government was being granted to Britain's Australian colonies, and suffrage qualifications were being debated. The resolution of universal rights progressed into the mid-20th century.
Black suffrage refers to black people's right to vote and has long been an issue in countries established under conditions of black minorities as well as, in some cases black majorities.
Voter turnout in US elections is measured as a percentage, calculated by dividing the total number of votes cast by the voting age population (VAP), or more recently, the voting eligible population (VEP). Voter turnout has varied over time, between states, and between demographic groups. In the United States, turnout is higher for presidential elections than for midterm elections. US turnout is generally lower than that in other advanced democracies.
The right to vote in Singapore is not explicitly stated in Singapore's Constitution, but the Government has expressed the view that it may be inferred from the fact that Singapore is a representative democracy and from specific constitutional provisions, including Articles 65 and 66 which set out requirements for the prorogation and dissolution of Parliament and the holding of general elections. Speaking on the matter in Parliament in 2009, the Minister for Law, K. Shanmugam, said that the right to vote could not be a mere privilege as this would imply the existence of an institution superior to the body of citizens that is empowered to grant such a privilege, but that no such institution exists in a free country. In 1966 a Constitutional Commission chaired by Chief Justice Wee Chong Jin advocated entrenching the right to vote within the Constitution, but this was not taken up by the Parliament of the day. When this proposal was repeated during the 2009 parliamentary debate, the Government took the view that such entrenchment was unnecessary.
A twenty-three-part referendum was held in Palau on 4 November 2008 alongside the country's general elections. Voters were asked questions on requirements of citizenship to hold office, government provision of primary school and health care, the definition of marriage and term limits for Parliament. Only the proposal permitting naturalization for certain adoptees failed to obtain the requisite majority of the vote and majority in 3/4th of the states.
This is a timeline of voting rights in the United States, documenting when various groups in the country gained the right to vote or were disenfranchised.
United States v. Susan B. Anthony was the criminal trial of Susan B. Anthony in a U.S. federal court in 1873. The defendant was a leader of the women's suffrage movement who was arrested for voting in Rochester, New York in the 1872 elections in violation of state laws that allowed only men to vote. Anthony argued that she had the right to vote because of the recently adopted Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, part of which reads, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."
The history of voting rights in Nigeria mirrors the complexity of the nation itself.
U.S. Supreme Court precedent is unchanged; states can let noncitizens vote if they choose. While Congress explicitly outlawed noncitizen voting in federal elections, the door remains open for local and state elections. ... And if America is going to call itself a democracy, the country ought to have one state that is an actual democracy.