California city keeps controversial language on ballot measure for non-citizens to vote: ‘Sugarcoating’

The Southern California city of Santa Ana has left intact controversial language in a ballot measure that would allow out-of-towners to vote in local elections, and has so far rejected a legal challenge to the language.

The Santa Ana City Council proposed a ballot measure in November that would ask voters to decide whether noncitizen residents of the city (including “taxpayers and parents”) should be able to participate in all city council elections. But conservative groups, including the California Public Policy Foundation, subsequently filed a lawsuit against the measure in Orange County Superior Court, arguing that the language was “illegally partisan” and that the measure “creates a more favorable impression by highlighting the constituency groups that would gain voting rights under the proposition.” According to LAist magazine.

Earlier this month, a county judge sided with the California Public Policy Foundation and other opponents in asking the city of Santa Ana to update the language on the ballot to be more neutral.

Nevertheless, the Santa Ana City Council voted last week to keep the controversial seven-word phrase in place, Politico reported. Council members who voted to keep the ballot measure in place said they had agreed to help the American Civil Liberties Union defend any future lawsuits.

Alabama elections official says Biden’s executive order gives illegal immigrants “a mechanism” to register to vote

“I think the term is fair. It simply describes who non-citizens are,” City Councilman Jonathan Hernandez told Politico during a meeting last week. “Today, non-citizens pay over $145 million in taxes in Orange County. Orange County would not be the county it is without non-citizens.”

Councilman David Penaloza disagreed, arguing that the city had escalated from “neutral and appropriate” language on the bill to “disingenuous” language intended to “persuade and influence” voters.

He reportedly said Congress had “air-deepened the language” as the bill continued to move forward.

“I don’t know why, but they included the word ‘parents,’ simply so that when someone goes to the ballot box they can read, ‘Oh, of course parents and taxpayers can vote, too,'” he added.

James Lacey, a lawyer and activist involved in the lawsuit, told Politico that while he opposes foreigners being able to vote in elections, he doesn’t oppose the issue remaining on the ballot.

“What they’re doing is, without a doubt, sweetening the ballot with positive statements to favor yes votes,” the spokesman said. “That’s advocacy. You can’t have a fair election if you do that.”

Lacey also told LAist in early June that the bill’s controversial language violates election law because it “biases voters and encourages them to vote yes.”

Santa Ana City Councilman Jonathan Ryan Hernandez applauds during a presentation at a City Council meeting on April 19, 2021. He supports controversial language in a ballot measure that would allow non-citizen parents and taxpayers to vote. (Genaro Molina/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)

While it is illegal for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 states that non-citizens are permitted to participate in other elections if they are “authorized to vote for other purposes under a State constitution, statute, or local ordinance.”

‘Political pandering’: Republicans denounce Biden’s ‘mass amnesty’ order as election-year ploy

Other California cities, including San Francisco and Oakland, have also made moves in recent years to allow non-citizens to vote in local elections, including school board elections.

In 2016, San Francisco passed a ballot measure known as Proposition N, allowing non-citizen parents and guardians of children living in the city to vote in local school board elections.

A San Francisco Superior Court judge said the measure was unconstitutional after facing legal challenges. A California Court of Appeals overturned that ruling last August, ruling that state and local governments, particularly charter cities, have the authority to enforce their own election rules at the city level. Like San Francisco, Santa Ana is a charter city.

A man heads to vote at the Orange County Board of Elections in Santa Ana, California, on Super Tuesday, March 5, 2024. (Frederick J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)

“I believe we can continue to challenge the issue of foreign voting and we will probably get a better outcome in the federal court system,” Lacey told LAist. “The California court system, and particularly the appeals court system, is populated with liberal Democratic judges.”

In a presidential election year, Republicans at the state and federal levels are seeking to restrict foreigners from voting and give states the power to clean up their voter rolls.

In an interview with Fox News Digital last week, Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen called on Congress to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 after discovering that foreign nationals who came into contact with Medicaid and other state welfare agencies in Alabama were being provided voter registration forms under the Biden administration’s broad interpretation of the law.

Last month, Reps. Chip Roy (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the Protecting American Voter Status Act, which, if passed, would require states to obtain proof of citizenship (in person) when registering to vote and would also require states to purge non-citizens from existing voter rolls.

Click here to get the FOX News app

According to Politico, voters in Missouri, South Carolina, Iowa, Kentucky and Wisconsin will decide this fall on ballot measures that would explicitly bar non-citizens from voting. Other states may follow suit. Last week, the North Carolina Legislature introduced a proposed amendment to the state constitution to clarify that only U.S. citizens who are 18 years of age or older and meet other qualifications “shall have the right to vote in any election.”