New York City’s attempt to allow certain noncitizens to vote in local elections was deemed unconstitutional on Wednesday, February 21st, by the Appellate Court, Second Department.
The law would have allowed 800,000 noncitizen legal residents to vote in municipal elections, potentially constituting 15% or more of the electorate in future elections.
The court’s decision, issued on Wednesday with a 3-to-1 vote, affirms much of a previous ruling from the Richmond County State Supreme Court on Staten Island in 2022.
The contentious law, Local Law 11, aimed to enable legal permanent residents and green card holders to vote in elections for key city positions, including mayor and City Council, and mandated establishing a new voter registration system for “municipal voter.”
The court’s majority, consisting of Justices Angela Iannacci, Paul Wooten, and Helen Voutsinas, objected to the law’s enactment through legislation rather than a public referendum, as mandated by the Municipal Home Rule Law for changes in electoral processes.
“The enactment of the Local Law without a referendum improperly obviates the fundamental right of the voters to participate in the electoral process,” the justices stated.
They also pointed out that altering the eligibility to vote in local elections might impact who could hold elected offices, implying that the law could enable noncitizens to occupy city-elected positions, including mayor.
Justice Lillian Wan, in her dissent, argued that this decision undermines local autonomy in election decisions and disenfranchises nearly a million city residents “despite the fact that its people’s duly elected representatives have opted to enfranchise those same residents.”
Wan wrote, “The majority, by deeming the noncitizen voting law invalid, effectively prohibits municipalities across the state from deciding for themselves the persons who are entitled to a voice in the local electoral process.”
The complaint filed in the court alleges that the Local Law would significantly expand the pool of eligible voters, thereby diluting the votes of United States citizens, including the voter plaintiffs.
It also argued that this change would result in a sudden and substantial alteration to the electorate’s composition, compelling the officeholder plaintiffs to modify their campaign strategies.
Election law experts, such as Sarah Steiner, anticipate the ruling to pose significant hurdles for proponents, especially given the current political climate surrounding immigration.
The law’s critics praised the court’s decision, including Staten Island borough president Vito Fossella, who initiated a lawsuit against the city following the law’s enactment.
Fossella stated, “You can’t just on a whim say, ‘Alright now we’re going to allow hundreds of thousands of people, even though they are noncitizens, the right to vote and choose in local municipal elections.”
Meanwhile, the city Law Department is considering its next steps, and advocates for the law, like attorney Cesar Ruiz of LatinoJustice PRLDEF, are deliberating an appeal.
Ruiz emphasized the law’s intention to acknowledge immigrants’ essential role in society by giving them a voice in local governance.
