The lines between American citizens and noncitizen immigrants who live here, legally or not, may become even more blurred this fall than they are today.
The newest move in this direction comes in Santa Ana, the county seat of the once reliably Republican Orange County, now mostly a “purple” area where hot races for Congress in recent years have been decided by thin margins.
The issue there now is whether non-citizens should be permitted to vote in strictly local elections and how that question should be presented to voters this fall.
Santa Ana’s city council wants voters to determine whether noncitizens who live in the city should participate in local elections. The city’s population of more than 308,000 includes about 5,600 Vietnamese noncitizen residents and more than 60,000 Latinos who also lack citizenship.
The ballot proposal contains seven words saying local noncitizens, “including those who are taxpayers and parents,” should get the right to vote. Noncitizen parents of public schoolchildren already can vote in San Francisco school board elections and all local noncitizens will soon be eligible for that and other local balloting in Oakland. The San Francisco voting expansion was first approved by a 54-46 percent margin in 2016.
It was quickly struck down by a trial judge, but later reinstated by the state Court of Appeal.
The U.S. Constitution does not ban such local expansion of voting rights, blurring distinctions between citizens and those who are not, but allows only citizen voting in federal elections. California state elections are similarly confined to U.S. citizens.
The trend toward noncitizen voting goes far beyond this state. One example: Just after New York City Mayor Eric Adams swore his oath of office in 2022, he flip-flopped to endorse a city measure letting noncitizens vote in local elections.
Adams opposed that plan during his campaign and did not sign the law, but let it take effect when he declined to veto it.
This is all part of a general blurring of differences between citizens and noncitizens. A prominent example came in 2015, when noncitizens began getting California drivers licenses virtually identical to those of citizens. Immigrant children are now eligible for state-paid medical care under Medi-Cal and pay in-state tuition for state colleges and universities if their residency qualifies them. Undocumented immigrants even have the right to practice law here under a bill signed in 2015 by ex-Gov. Jerry Brown. But they cannot serve on juries.
Mere days after Adams allowed virtually universal voting in New York, Callifornia Gov. Gavin Newsom expanded Medi-Cal health insurance for the poor to cover undocumented immigrants between ages 26 and 50.
Each of these moves lessened the motivation for immigrants to work toward citizenship. The rationale for each step along this path has been that noncitizens, regardless of their legal status, are part of the fabric of communities where they live.
Said Adams on his inauguration day, “I believe that all New Yorkers should have a say in their government…I look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process.”
But some in Santa Ana questioned whether the “taxpayers and parents” language in the current noncitizen voting proposal would bias voters toward approving it. Conservative organizations challenged that wording in court and got a county judge to order the language made more neutral.
But the city council nevertheless opted to keep the original text, despite objections from Councilman David Penaloza, who called the language “disingenuous” and meant “to persuade and influence voters.”
For sure, if this measure passes, it will face a new court challenge. Because the U.S. Constitution is silent about who can vote in local elections, there’s a good chance the current measure would survive.
Meanwhile, other places are moving to ban noncitizen voting. Six states already have such rules, while measures to ban noncitizen voting at all levels are on the ballot in five others this fall.
Plus, there is no active move to give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship or to reduce the current application cost for others, now about $760 per person.
It all leads to a confused situation with few immigrants knowing both their rights and what is prohibited to them.
Email Thomas Elias at tdelias@aol.com.
