Several noncitizen voting cases are challenging the federal government’s power to prosecute people accused of illegally voting in US elections.
Five defendants facing separate federal cases in Florida and Wisconsin have argued that the 1996 law used against them violates the US Constitution.
The legal challenges come as President Donald Trump pushes a tougher campaign against alleged noncitizen voting.
Noncitizen Voting Cases Target 1996 Federal Law
The defendants face charges under a federal law commonly known as the “Voting by Aliens” statute.
Congress passed the law in 1996. It makes it illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections and allows prosecutors to seek fines of up to $100,000 or prison terms of up to one year.
However, the defendants argue that the Constitution gives states primary authority over voter qualifications.
Their lawyers say states already determine who can vote and should therefore handle cases involving violations of those rules.
Defendants Question Congress’s Authority
The constitutional challenge centers on the balance of power between Congress and the states.
The defendants argue that Congress cannot simply take control of an area that the Constitution reserves to the states.
If judges accept that argument, federal prosecutors could lose an important tool for pursuing noncitizen voting allegations.
The Justice Department strongly disagrees.
Justice Department Defends Federal Prosecutions
Trump’s Justice Department argues that Congress has broad authority to protect federal elections.
Government lawyers point to Supreme Court decisions recognizing federal power over election-related offenses. They also cite federal laws that punish conduct such as voting more than once in the same election.
The DOJ has offered another argument as well.
It says the 1996 law primarily addresses immigration rather than regulating elections. Congress has clear constitutional authority over immigration, according to the government.
Trump Administration Raises the Stakes
The legal fight has gained greater importance under Trump’s second administration.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that noncitizens voting in US elections represents a widespread threat. However, available evidence suggests that such voting remains extremely uncommon.
A Reuters analysis published in July found that only 129 people had been charged under the federal law during its roughly 30-year history.
Many defendants were lawful permanent residents who had lived in their communities for years and mistakenly believed they could vote.
Deportation Changes the Consequences
The potential consequences have also increased.
Before Trump’s second term, many defendants resolved noncitizen voting cases through plea agreements and received relatively small fines.
The Trump administration has also pursued deportation proceedings against some noncitizen voters.
As a result, defendants now face far greater immigration consequences alongside possible criminal penalties.
Florida and Wisconsin Cases Lead Challenge
Christian Erazo Valdez became one of the first defendants to raise the constitutional argument.
Court records show that Valdez, an Ecuadorian citizen, faced charges in Wisconsin over voting in the 2024 presidential election.
His lawyers asked a federal judge in Madison to dismiss the case on constitutional grounds.
A decision could help determine whether similar challenges gain momentum in other courts.
Miami Case Draws Outside Legal Review
A separate case in Miami involves Chelsea Cox, a Jamaican citizen accused of voting in a federal election.
US District Judge David Leibowitz asked for outside analysis of the constitutional issue.
Former US Solicitor General Paul Clement later submitted a 43-page report. He concluded that Congress likely lacked authority to enact the statute, although he acknowledged that the constitutional question was not straightforward.
That opinion could carry weight as courts consider the issue.
Another Judge Rejects Constitutional Challenge
Not every judge has accepted the defendants’ argument.
On September 9, US District Judge Jacqueline Becerra rejected a similar request from Wilner Renaud, a Haitian citizen.
Renaud entered the United States in 1993 and had a pending citizenship application when he voted in the 2022 federal election.
According to court records, Renaud told investigators that he believed he was already a US citizen.
His case nevertheless moved forward.
Midterm Elections Add Political Pressure
The legal dispute comes weeks before the November 3 midterm elections.
Republicans are trying to maintain control of Congress, while Democrats hope to win enough seats to take control of one or both chambers.
Election experts have warned that repeated claims about widespread noncitizen voting could fuel doubts about election results if Democrats make major gains.
That makes the court battles especially significant.
Courts Could Shape Future Voting Enforcement
A ruling in favor of the defendants could limit federal prosecution of noncitizen voting allegations.
Such a decision would not mean noncitizens could legally vote in federal elections. Instead, it would focus on which level of government has the constitutional authority to prosecute violations.
The distinction could have major consequences for future election enforcement.
Several defendants want courts to resolve the constitutional question before their trials begin.
For now, judges across Florida and Wisconsin must weigh competing arguments about federal power, state election authority and the limits of congressional control.
The outcome could determine how the government handles noncitizen voting cases long after the 2026 midterm elections.
