New York City was ordered on Monday by a judge in Staten Island to end its practice of permitting non citizens to conduct municipal elections. A Republican brought suit against the city, who won their case.
Justice Ralph Porzio found that the City Council ordinance violated the State Constitution, which states that only citizens may vote. Republicans on Staten Island welcomed his ruling with enthusiasm.
Constitutional Rights
There are only a handful of cities and towns across the U.S. that permit noncitizens to vote in municipal elections – including San Francisco and cities in Maryland and Vermont – but an increasing number of Republicans are using their opposition to this practice as a rallying point nationally.
Staten Island residents led by Republican elected officials led by Borough President Vito Fossella and state GOP Chair Nick Langworthy filed the Staten Island lawsuit against an anti-voting law that would enfranchise over 800,000 city residents who live, work and pay taxes but who do not possess U.S. citizenship rights, alleging it violates both their State Constitution as well as home rule laws.
City residents who are noncitizens will now be allowed to vote in local and school board elections starting next year, provided they had resided for 30 days or longer in Oregon. Unfortunately, this legislation would not extend to statewide or federal elections; City Hall is exploring their options for appealing.
Requirement of a Referendum
New York state’s constitution and election laws confirm that voting is only a right available to citizens, according to this lawsuit. Furthermore, city laws which allowed green card holders to vote in municipal elections but disallowed them from eligibility in state or federal elections violated both laws and constitutional provisions of New York state.
City council could have avoided court intervention had it put the question of allowing noncitizen voting into a referendum for voters to approve; instead, they implemented legislation which Staten Island Supreme Court Justice Ralph Porzio struck down as violating state constitutionality and home rule law.
Porzio found that New York City cannot circumvent restrictions imposed by New York State Constitution and municipal home rule law, ruling against Mayor Adams in this matter and having major ramifications on upcoming elections such as governor and congressional races which are expected to be closely contested. He expected his decision would likely be appealed; according to Mayor Adams’ spokesperson a decision has yet to be taken by them on whether or not to appeal it.
Disenfranchisement of Citizens
Ralph Porzio of Staten Island’s State Supreme Court Justice who struck the ordinance, ruling it violated state constitutional provisions ensuring voting rights for citizens only, has blocked it. His ruling follows suit filed by Republican opponents including Staten Island Borough President Vito Fossella and state GOP Chairman Nick Langworthy who filed suit challenging it.
Law passed by the City Council in December would have given noncitizen residents, such as green card holders or those with federal work authorization, voting rights in local elections such as mayor or City Council members. But Judge Porzio determined that such legislation did not meet constitutional criteria and required a referendum allowing these noncitizens to cast ballots for local offices such as mayor or City Council member.
Nora Moran, Policy and Advocacy Director for United Neighborhood Houses who championed this law, found the ruling disappointing for those seeking to engage thousands of New Yorkers in democratic processes; but she said advocates around the country had come seeking assistance in creating their own laws.
Legal Issues
On Monday, a judge found the New York City law permitting noncitizens to vote in local elections unconstitutional. This bill passed by City Council in December 2021 created a new class of voters entitled to participate in municipal elections for mayor and other citywide offices; noncitizens with legal permanent resident cards or authorization to work in the US (known as Dreamers) were allowed to cast votes; but were ineligible for state and federal offices.
Supporters of the measure argued it would give an electoral voice to hundreds of thousands of taxpayers and contributors who don’t currently have access to voting in federal and state elections, yet pay taxes and contribute to their communities despite lacking an entitlement to do so. But opponents contended it violated State Constitution, election law and municipal home rule law as well as disenfranchise legal voting-age residents – an argument the Staten Island Supreme Court justice who struck down the law agreed with.
- Friday Intraday Trading Sees Nvidia’s stock Market Cap Momentarily Cross $2 Trillion
- Trump’s January 6 Civil Cases Proceed While Criminal Case Is Halted
- Trump Delivers Speech at the Columbia Black Conservative Federation Gala
- Trump Declares Strong Support for IVF Following Alabama Supreme Court Decision
- Schumer in Ukraine Declares US Backing During House Aid Standoff