Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel announced Thursday that five noncitizens have been criminally charged with offenses involving voting or attempted voting, another reminder that election laws do not enforce themselves.
The cases stem from Michigan’s November 2024 general election and are part of a larger investigation into suspected noncitizen voting. According to Nessel’s office, the Michigan Department of State referred 16 cases during 2025 involving suspected noncitizen voting in the 2024 election. Another 22 cases were referred in 2026 involving suspected illegal voting or related activity in elections stretching from 2009 through 2025.
That makes 38 cases under consideration. Six have resulted in criminal charges, ten were closed without charges, and another 22 remain under review.
The five noncitizens charged include lawful permanent residents, a limited-term alien resident and a United Kingdom resident. None were U.S. citizens, according to the attorney general’s office.
The allegations are serious. Charges include fraudulent voter registration, election law forgery, perjury, false statements involving absentee ballot materials and attempting to vote as an unqualified elector. Depending on the offense, potential penalties range from 90 days behind bars to several years in prison.
One U.S. citizen was also charged in connection with allegedly registering a noncitizen spouse to vote.
“In my office, we’ve always taken election crimes seriously, and prosecute attacks on our voting systems to the fullest extent of the law. We’re upholding election integrity by investigating all claims of non-citizen voters, as rare as they are, and holding bad actors accountable when they refuse to abide by the laws that keep our elections safe and secure,” Nessel said.
“These charges reflect the severity of the allegations, the sanctity of our democracy, and the tremendous consequences of voting illegally— whether that’s done to try and ‘test’ security measures or to make an unlawful vote count.”
Nessel characterized noncitizen voting as rare, and the numbers involved here are indeed tiny compared with the more than 5.7 million ballots cast in Michigan’s 2024 general election. But rarity is not an argument for ignoring violations. Bank robbery is rare too. Nobody suggests removing the locks.
The cases also demonstrate why determining citizenship status can become complicated. Among the investigations closed without charges, authorities found that two people were actually U.S. citizens. Another was presumed to be a citizen because of an early international adoption despite incomplete documentation. Investigators also encountered a federally recognized American Indian born in Canada who did not possess U.S. citizenship or voting rights.
Those circumstances show why investigations require evidence rather than political assumptions.
But they also raise an obvious question: Why should state election officials have difficulty promptly determining whether someone is legally qualified to vote?
Nessel acknowledged that some investigations were complicated by limited access to federal citizenship records. That is precisely the kind of bureaucratic gap lawmakers should want to close. Accurate voter rolls should not depend on crossed fingers and paperwork scattered between agencies.
Michigan officials say registrations connected with every identified noncitizen voter have now been cancelled, regardless of whether criminal charges were filed.
The prosecutions do not prove that noncitizen voting occurred on a massive scale, and five alleged ballots among millions would not establish such a claim. What they do prove is considerably simpler: suspected violations exist, investigations can uncover them, and safeguards matter.
Voting in American elections is a right of eligible American citizens. Protecting that right means making participation easy for lawful voters while making illegal participation difficult, detectable and punishable.
Michigan still has 22 cases under review. However those investigations end, election officials should treat the episode as motivation to improve citizenship verification, information sharing and voter-roll maintenance.
Election integrity should not be controversial. If government can verify your income for taxes with remarkable enthusiasm, surely it can figure out whether someone is legally eligible to cast a ballot.
Leave a Comment