Liberals and the D. C. Board of Elections are pushing to allow noncitizens — including prospective foreign spies — to voting in local votes.
The D. C. Board of Elections may head to the D. C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday to struggle to keep a city law allowing , noncitizens , to voting in local elections. The petition centers around the Regional Native Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022, which , permits noncitizens , eighteen or older who have lived in D. C. for at least 30 days before to an vote to vote for regional authorities and on vote efforts.
With an estimated 10, 000 foreign spies operating in Washington D. C. and the U. S. investment also hosting diplomats from unusual and often unfriendly governments like China, the security risks of such a law are clear. FBI counterintelligence expert Brian Dugan previously warned that foreign adversaries pose an “unprecedented” threat and that spies often blend into everyday life, posing as students, professors or even neighbors.
Yet, Democrats are determined to extend voting rights to noncitizens residing in D. C., and potentially to agents operating on behalf of foreign governments.
]READ NEXT: Letting Noncitizens Vote In U. S. Elections Is Foreign Interference]
In 2023, the Federation for American Immigration Reform filed a lawsuit against the D. C. Board of Elections on behalf of multiple D. C. residents. The complaint challenged the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act as unconstitutional and argued the law dilutes the votes of U. S. citizens.
” Noncitizens do not have a fundamental right to vote in the United States. Nor does any noncitizen”, the lawsuit states. ” By necessary operation, the D. C. Noncitizen Voting Act dilutes the vote of every U. S. citizen voter in the District. Because it does so, the D. C. Noncitizen Voting Act is subject to review under both the equal protection and the substantive due process components of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution”.
The suit further alleges the law violates the” constitutional right of citizens to govern, and be governed by, themselves, and should be struck down on that basis” by allowing noncitizens to “hold public office in D. C”.
The D. C. Board of Elections in turn defended the law and contended the suit should be tossed because plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge allowing foreigners ‘ participation in U. S. elections.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson tossed the suit last year, arguing plaintiffs failed to show their votes were individually “disadvantaged” or” treated differently than noncitizens ‘ votes”.
” ]Plaintiffs ] may object as a matter of policy to the fact that immigrants get to vote at all, but their votes will not receive less weight or be treated differently than noncitizens ‘ votes”, Berman wrote in her opinion. ” At bottom, they are simply raising a generalized grievance which is insufficient to confer standing”.
In their appeal, “plaintiffs , asked , the D. C. Circuit Court to rule on the matter of standing and the law’s constitutionality”, according to Democracy Docket.
The Washington Post previously , noted , the law would permit an estimated 50, 000 noncitizens to cast a ballot.
In 2023, House Republicans and 42 Democrats tried to block the legislation. However, the resolution expired in a Senate committee, meaning the bill became law. House Republicans tried again last year to bar noncitizens from voting in local D. C. elections. But as my colleague M. D. Kittle reported, most House Democrats voted against the measure and the bill died in the Senate.
Brianna Lyman is an elections correspondent at The Federalist. Brianna graduated from Fordham University with a degree in International Political Economy. Her work has been featured on Newsmax, Fox News, Fox Business and RealClearPolitics. Follow Brianna on X: @briannalyman2
