Expanding Democracy: The Case for Noncitizen Voting Rights in the U.S.

Winter 2025

Kenneth Chen

Edited by: Annaliese Damm

With President Donald Trump's plans for mass deportation beginning to take root, the political equity of immigrants has been directly threatened. Should a lack of citizenship preclude someone from advocating for their children’s best interests? The concept of suffrage is a fundamental aspect of democratic governance and has proved a contentious issue since the establishment of the United States. In the late 18th century, the right to vote was limited to a narrow segment of the population: white, landowning males. Over time, through the 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th constitutional amendments, voting rights have gradually expanded to include all United States citizens over the age of 18, regardless of race, sex, or ability to pay poll taxes. Currently, noncitizens, such as permanent legal residents like Green Card holders, refugees, and asylum seekers, are barred from voting in federal, state, and most local elections. Supporters of noncitizen voting argue that such individuals have large stakes in their local communities, and allowing them to vote would encourage civic engagement, thereby enhancing the path to citizenship. Yet, opponents cite that noncitizen voting ultimately dilutes the voting power of citizens, undermining the traditional link between citizenship and democracy. In July of 2016, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors voted to place Proposition N on the ballot, a measure that would allow noncitizen residents of San Francisco to vote for members of the Board of Education [1]. Proposition N passed with fifty-four percent approval in November 2016, and was made permanent by Ordinance No. 206-21 in October of 2021 [2]. The proposition faced continued legal challenges, demonstrated by the case James V. Lacy, et al., v. City and County of San Francisco, et al., which resulted in a local Superior Court judge ruling Prop N unconstitutional in July 2022 [3]. However, a California Court of Appeal overturned this decision later that November, stating that Prop N was indeed permissible under the state constitution and the City Charter [4]. San Francisco’s unique history of immigration and sanctuary city status were undoubtedly key factors in the passing of Prop N. This article will discuss the implementation of noncitizen voting in San Francisco and assess the effectiveness of its policy, particularly by weighing the willingness of noncitizens to participate in the process. It will also discuss the implications of noncitizen voting on future applications for naturalization, and whether a significant portion of immigrant parents prioritize school board elections over the prospect of citizenship. Lastly, this article will explore the broader context of noncitizen voting in the United States by examining goals of the current presidential administration in relation to the prospect of widespread noncitizen voting in the future. If adequate protections are afforded for participants, gradual implementation could serve to bolster legal immigration.

Though relatively uncommon, San Francisco is not the only city in the United States that permits noncitizen voting. Today, the number of jurisdictions with voting rights for noncitizen immigrants stands at 16: ten towns in Maryland, three cities in Vermont, San Francisco, Oakland, and the District of Columbia [5]. This number has recently decreased–New York City’s noncitizen voting law was found to violate the New York State Constitution and struck down in early 2024 [6]. At the same time, 15 states (Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Wisconsin) have explicitly banned this prospect through their state constitutions [7].

San Francisco has openly proclaimed itself a sanctuary city since 1989, striving to support its immigrant community by generally prohibiting city employees from using city resources to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the enforcement of federal immigration law [8]. Its sanctuary city status allows all students to “attend public school, regardless of their immigration status or that of their family members” [9]. Immigrant residents account for about one-third of the city’s population, and the Office of Civic Engagement and Immigrant Affairs estimates a population of 44,000 eligible to vote under Prop N [10]. Still, noncitizen voting remains limited in effectiveness due to systemic factors. In the 2022 recall of three school board members, only 235 votes were cast through this program [11]. Outraged by the school district’s response to COVID-19, supporters of the recall rallied against extended school closures and mismanagement of operational priorities. In particular, parents criticized the district’s effort to rename 44 public schools instead of reopening them [12]. The special election garnered over 175,000 votes, about a quarter of San Francisco’s registered voter population [13]. Though overall turnout for the special election met expectations, legal challenges, lack of access to information, and fear of personal risk continue to suppress noncitizen participation. Many immigrant parents are unaware they possess this right, and others have expressed concerns about safety and privacy when registering to vote. To stimulate turnout and reduce the effects of incomplete information, expansion must be coupled with vigilant efforts to increase awareness.

The future of noncitizen voting also faces uncertainty–President Trump’s “Executive Order 14159 entitled “Protecting the American People Against Invasion” orders federal agencies to illegally cut off federal funding to sanctuary jurisdictions” [14]. In response, San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu, alongside a coalition of other local jurisdictions, announced a lawsuit against the Trump administration citing policies that illegally harm sanctuary cities. He states, “This is the federal government illegally asserting a right it does not have, telling cities how to use their resources, and commandeering local law enforcement. This is the federal government coercing local officials to bend to their will or face defunding or prosecution. That is illegal and authoritarian" [15]. Trump’s blanketing executive actions and mass deportation efforts undermine noncitizen voting, even if the actual policies vary in legality and success. Local resources must be diverted to combat federal overreach, siphoning funds from programs that actually benefit the people.

Allowing noncitizens suffrage in local elections promotes civic engagement and is a precursor to the social duty that citizens have in representative democracies. It offers the opportunity for community members to enact change and directly affect the lives of their families. By allowing those striving for naturalization to gain invaluable insight into political systems, they may be more inclined to become active voices and voters in the future. Permanent legal residents should be incentivized to embrace democratic processes and responsibilities, not prohibited from them. 

Giving noncitizens a channel for advocacy contributes to a more inclusive democracy and consequently fosters a sense of belonging within immigrant communities. Ron Hayduk, a political science professor at San Francisco State University, states, “When you have parents more involved in their kids’ classrooms and schools and the system in general, it improves education outcomes. The students do better” [16]. The welfare of students is of utmost importance, and the protection of students’ aggregate interests necessitates the inclusion of noncitizen input. Noncitizens also pay taxes without a proportional degree of representation in their constituencies. If permitted to bear financial costs equivalent to those of citizens, they should likewise receive the privileges of representation.

The rise of immigration in the United States has led to increasingly polarizing reactions, primarily along party lines. Conservatives’ unsupported fears about widespread voter fraud have led to alterations in several state constitutions’ language, explicitly requiring citizenship to vote [17]. This is further complicated by the Trump administration’s emphasis on immigration enforcement. The White House Border Czar “recently said in a media interview that the new enforcement campaign will ‘seek to deport families together, even if they have young U.S.-born children, leaving it to those families to decide whether to exit together or be split up.’ Forcing families to make such impossible decisions will cause deep and irreparable trauma for a generation of children” [18]. This would wipe out immigrant populations and eliminate the option of including immigrants in elections. “Public schools should be safe spaces under the Supreme Court case Plyler v. Doe, which guarantees educational access for students regardless of immigration status. The Trump administration could try to undermine Plyler through enhanced immigration enforcement around schools and schoolyards, or by abolishing Obama and Biden administration moves to expand sensitive location policies to schools” [19]. If Trump is successful, the dominion of education would return to the states, and it becomes highly unlikely that noncitizens have any say in a majority of the country. 

There is still reason to believe that noncitizen voting can succeed in the United States. The expansion of similar rights continues to be contested, but active campaigns exist in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, and Illinois [20]. Additionally, noncitizen voting was once supported by historical precedent. Matt Vasilogambros writes, “During the first 150 years of the U.S., 40 states at various times permitted noncitizens to vote in elections. That came to a halt in the 1920s when nativism ramped up and states began making voting a privilege for only U.S. citizens" [21]. The return to this state of affairs necessitates years of progress, but it is certainly not out of the question. As immigration policies continue to shift, especially under administrations with opposing views on noncitizen rights, the future of noncitizen voting relies on persistent advocacy and awareness. If supporters successfully address concerns about voter education and security, the concept could gain broader acceptance, particularly in jurisdictions with large immigrant populations. Whether or not noncitizen voting becomes more widespread, the debate poses a fundamental question: Should democracy be solely the privilege of citizenship, or should it also recognize the voices of those who contribute to and are shaped by the communities they call home?

References

[1] San Francisco Proposition N, Non-Citizen Voting in School Board Elections, 2016 Ballot (San Francisco, CA) https://aelc.assembly.ca.gov/sites/aelc.assembly.ca.gov/files/hearings/SF%20Measure%20N%20Nov%202016.pdf

[2] San Francisco Municipal Elections Code § 206-21, Non-United States Citizen Voting in School Board Elections, enacted November 2, 2021 https://sfbos.org/sites/default/files/o0206-21.pdf

[3] James V. Lacy et al., v. City and County of San Francisco, et al., A165899 City & County of San Francisco Super. Ct. (2023) https://law.justia.com/cases/california/court-of-appeal/2023/a165899.html

[4] “Non-citizen Voting Rights in Local Board of Education Elections | SF.gov” https://www.sf.gov/non-citizen-voting-rights-local-board-education-elections

[5] “Laws Permitting Noncitizens to Vote in the United States - Ballotpedia” https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_permitting_noncitizens_to_vote_in_the_United_States

[6] Dan Rivoli, “Noncitizen voting law found to violate state constitution,” Spectrum News, February 23, 2024 https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2024/02/23/noncitizen-voting-law-found-to-violate-state-constitution#

[7] “Laws Permitting Noncitizens to Vote in the United States - Ballotpedia”

[8] “Sanctuary City Ordinance | SF.gov”https://www.sf.gov/information--sanctuary-city-ordinance

[9] Allyson Aleksey, “Supporters of Noncitizen SF Voters Say They Expect Higher School-board Turnout,” San Francisco Examiner, November 20, 2024 https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/politics/sf-school-board-election-noncitizen-turnout-not-yet-clear/article_7d73cb42-a6c8-11ef-8f10-277b3a6993be.html

[10] Aleksey, “Supporters of Noncitizen SF Voters”

[11] Aleksey, “Supporters of Noncitizen SF Voters”

[12] Thomas Fuller, “In Landslide, San Francisco Forces Out 3 Board of Education Members,” New York Times, February 16, 2022 https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/16/us/san-francisco-school-board-recall.html

[13] “San Francisco Unified School District Recall, California (2021-2022) - Ballotpedia” https://ballotpedia.org/San_Francisco_Unified_School_District_recall,_California_(2021-2022)

[14] S.F. City Attorney’s Press Office, “San Francisco Leads Lawsuit Protecting Sanctuary Jurisdictions From Illegal Federal Overreach,” February 10, 2025 https://www.sfcityattorney.org/2025/02/07/san-francisco-leads-lawsuit-protecting-sanctuary-jurisdictions-from-illegal-federal-overreach/#:~:text=San%20Francisco's%20sanctuary%20laws%20have,or%20have%20lower%20crime%20rates.

[15] S.F. City Attorney, “San Francisco Leads Lawsuit Protecting Sanctuary Jurisdictions From Illegal Federal Overreach”

[16] Adam Shanks, “Why Aren’t More Noncitizens Voting in San Francisco?,” San Francisco Examiner, August 14, 2023 https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/politics/why-more-noncitizens-arent-voting-in-sf-school-races/article_be7cd5b4-37d1-11ee-bc57-97bd1533bffd.html

[17] Matt Vasilogambros, “Though noncitizens can vote in few local elections, GOP goes big to make it illegal,” Stateline, May 6, 2024 https://stateline.org/2024/05/06/though-noncitizens-can-vote-in-few-local-elections-gop-goes-big-to-make-it-illegal/

[18] “Immigration Enforcement and US Schools: What Could Happen and What Education Leaders Can Do,” Brookings, January 13, 2025 https://www.brookings.edu/articles/immigration-enforcement-and-u-s-schools-what-could-happen-and-what-education-leaders-can-do/

[19] Brookings, “Immigration Enforcement and US Schools”

[20] “City With Campaigns — IVR,” IVR https://www.immigrantvotingrights.com/cititeswithcampaigns

[21] Vasilogambros, “Though noncitizens can vote in few local elections, GOP goes big to make it illegal”