The Biden-Harris Border Crisis: Noncitizen Voting

The hearing "The Biden-Harris Border Crisis: Noncitizen Voting" explores the intersection of immigration policy and voting rights for noncitizens.

By Harinethra Ramanathan September 11, 2024

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SUBJECT: The Biden-Harris Border Crisis: Noncitizen Voting

DATE: September 10, 2024

OVERVIEW: The Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government convened to address concerns regarding noncitizen voting in U.S. federal elections. The hearing examined allegations of widespread voter registration fraud, facilitated by policies under the Biden-Harris Administration, and debated the efficacy of the SAVE Act in addressing these issues. Discussions centered on the role of federal voter registration laws, the integrity of state voter rolls, and the constitutional implications of requiring proof of citizenship to vote.

HEARING RECORDING LINK: https://judiciary.house.gov

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Witnesses

  • Cord Byrd, Secretary of State, Florida Department of State 
  • Ms. Rosemary Jenks, Policy Director, Immigration Accountability Project 
  • Ms. Cleta Mitchell, Senior Legal Fellow, Conservative Partnership Institute 
  • Ms. Andrea E. Senteno, Regional Counsel, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF).

Key Themes & Highlights

  • Republican Concerns:
    • "Widespread Fraud Allegations: Republicans highlighted data suggesting significant instances of noncitizens voting in federal elections, facilitated by the inadequacies of current voter registration laws. They argued that such votes could decisively impact razor-thin election margins.
    • Proof of Citizenship Requirements: Advocated for the SAVE Act, emphasizing its necessity in requiring proof of citizenship during voter registration. Republicans contended that current federal law prevents states from enforcing such safeguards.
    • Federal Overreach: Criticized the federal government’s lack of cooperation in providing states access to reliable citizenship verification databases, which hampers efforts to maintain clean voter rolls.
  • Democratic Concerns:
    • Voter Suppression Risks: Democrats argued that the SAVE Act would disenfranchise eligible voters, particularly naturalized citizens, minority communities, and those lacking access to required documentation, such as passports or birth certificates.
    • Mischaracterization of Noncitizen Voting: Emphasized that documented cases of noncitizen voting are exceedingly rare and often the result of administrative errors rather than intentional fraud.
    • Protection of Voting Rights: Advocated for policies like the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to protect vulnerable populations from voter suppression tactics.
  • Witness Testimonies:
    • Cord Byrd: Emphasized Florida’s efforts to maintain clean voter rolls and prosecute noncitizens who attempt to vote. He described challenges with outdated federal databases, such as the SAVE system, which impede states' ability to verify citizenship effectively.
    • Rosemary Jenks: Argued that federal voter laws combined with widespread issuance of driver's licenses and Social Security numbers to noncitizens create a system ripe for abuse. She supported the SAVE Act as a critical measure to safeguard election integrity.
    • Cleta Mitchell: Highlighted systemic vulnerabilities in voter registration processes that allow noncitizens to register and vote. She endorsed the SAVE Act as a necessary step to secure elections and prevent fraudulent practices.
    • Andrea E. Senteno: Opposed the SAVE Act, citing its disproportionate impact on naturalized citizens and communities of color. She advocated for strengthening protections against voter suppression and questioned the reliability of data supporting noncitizen voting allegations.
  • Contentious Points:
    • Republicans: Asserted that the SAVE Act would address systemic issues in voter registration and protect the integrity of elections.
    • Democrats: Countered that the act would suppress eligible voters and exacerbate disenfranchisement in marginalized communities.
  • Key Discussions:
    • State vs. Federal Authority: Explored the constitutional implications of federal voter registration laws that limit states’ ability to enforce proof of citizenship requirements.
    • Accuracy of Voter Fraud Claims: Debated the validity of studies suggesting widespread noncitizen voting and their impact on recent elections.
    • Database Deficiencies: Discussed the limitations of existing federal systems like SAVE in providing timely and accurate citizenship verification to states. 

In-Depth Notes

  • Chairman Chip Roy criticized the Biden-Harris Administration for policies he claimed incentivize noncitizen voting and undermine election integrity. He emphasized the importance of the SAVE Act in preventing fraud.
  • Ranking Member Mary Gay Scanlon opposed the SAVE Act, calling it a “voter suppression” measure. She emphasized the rarity of noncitizen voting and highlighted studies debunking claims of widespread fraud.
  • Representative Jerrold Nadler argued that Republicans’ focus on noncitizen voting is a politically motivated distraction from broader voting rights issues.
  • Representative Harriet Hageman supported the SAVE Act as a necessary step to address voter registration vulnerabilities and protect U.S. citizens' rights.