RismadarVoice Reporters
September 15, 2026
Five noncitizens facing federal charges for allegedly voting illegally in U.S. elections are challenging the constitutionality of the law under which they are being prosecuted, potentially opening a new legal battle over the federal government’s authority to police noncitizen voting.
The defendants, in separate cases in Miami, Florida, and Madison, Wisconsin, argue that the 1996 federal “Voting by Aliens” statute is unconstitutional because the U.S. Constitution leaves the determination of voter qualifications primarily to the states.
Their challenges could produce rulings before the November 3 midterm elections, potentially affecting how the federal government handles similar cases and intensifying an already contentious national debate over election administration and voting by noncitizens.
The federal law makes it a crime for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. Violators can face fines of up to $100,000 or imprisonment for as long as one year.
The defendants contend that although states require voters to be citizens, enforcement of violations should fall within state authority rather than being prosecuted by the federal government.
The Trump administration’s Justice Department has rejected that argument. Prosecutors maintain that Congress has constitutional authority to protect the integrity of federal elections and to legislate on immigration matters, which the government argues is the principal focus of the 1996 statute.
The Justice Department has also pointed to other federal election laws, including restrictions on repeat voting, as evidence that Congress has authority to criminalise conduct affecting federal elections. It has argued that the law is connected to immigration enforcement and was enacted as part of the broader Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.
The constitutional challenges come as President Donald Trump has made noncitizen voting a major part of his election-related agenda and has repeatedly claimed that illegal voting by noncitizens is widespread.
However, a Reuters analysis found that prosecutions under the federal statute have been extremely limited. Only 129 people had been charged under the law during its roughly 30-year history, with many defendants being lawful permanent residents who said they mistakenly believed they were eligible to vote.
The cases have taken on greater significance under the Trump administration because federal authorities have moved beyond the relatively modest penalties that previously characterised many noncitizen voting prosecutions and have pushed for deportation of some defendants.
Before Trump’s second term, many defendants resolved cases through plea agreements and received fines of about $150. The administration’s immigration enforcement policies have substantially increased the potential consequences for those accused.
CASES IN FLORIDA AND WISCONSIN
One of the constitutional challenges was brought by Christian Erazo Valdez, an Ecuadorian citizen charged with voting in the 2024 presidential election. His case is pending in federal court in Madison, Wisconsin, where a ruling on his request to dismiss the charges is expected.
Another case involves Chelsea Cox, a Jamaican woman accused of voting in the 2020 federal election. U.S. District Judge David Leibowitz in Miami sought independent legal analysis of the constitutionality of the statute.
Former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, who served under Republican President George W. Bush, was asked to provide an outside assessment. In a 43-page report submitted in July, Clement concluded that Congress likely lacked authority to enact the statute, although he said the constitutional question was not entirely clear-cut.
Not every defendant has succeeded with the constitutional argument.
On September 9, U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Becerra in Miami rejected a dismissal request from Wilner Renaud, a Haitian citizen who entered the United States in 1993. Renaud had a pending application for U.S. citizenship when he voted in the 2022 federal election and told investigators that he believed he was already a U.S. citizen.
His case proceeded to trial on Monday.
The five defendants challenging the law are seeking dismissal of their charges before their respective trials, with some proceedings scheduled to begin as early as October 5 and the last of the five currently scheduled for December 14.
The outcome of the constitutional challenges could determine whether the federal government retains broad authority to prosecute alleged noncitizen voting or whether such cases must primarily be handled by individual states.
The legal dispute is unfolding alongside wider preparations for the November midterm elections, when control of Congress will be contested. State and local election officials are already preparing for potential federal intervention, legal disputes and challenges to election administration, adding further significance to any court ruling on the scope of federal election authority.
