The U.S. Justice Department sent letters to election officials in all 50 states and the District of Columbia on Tuesday, warning that they could face criminal prosecution for allowing noncitizens to vote. The letters demand a response within five days detailing how states will maintain clean voter lists and ensure federal eligibility compliance.
Criminal Liability and the Five-Day Deadline
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, signed the warnings sent to state election chiefs. According to NBC News, the letters explicitly state that election officers who knowingly retain noncitizens on a statewide voter registration list (SVRL) or facilitate their casting of ballots could be subject to criminal liability.
The DOJ is framing these warnings as a request for voluntary compliance. A Justice Department spokesperson stated:
“The Department sent these letters to all 50 states and the District of Columbia, asking for voluntary compliance in a timely manner with their obligations under federal law to ensure only citizens vote in federal elections,”
Justice Department spokesperson
Beyond simple registration errors, the department warned that “An intentional act that is aimed at diluting the votes of citizens could also constitute a violation” of federal law.
State Reactions: From ‘Bizarre’ to ‘Insulting’
Responses from state officials have ranged from procedural caution to open defiance. In Hawaii, Chief Election Officer Scott Nago told Honolulu Civil Beat that while he must consult general counsel before responding, the requirement to respond is a key difference from previous communications.
The letter is saying you’ve got to follow federal law, which we would follow anyway. It’s not optional to follow the law.
Scott Nago, Hawaii Chief Election Officer
Other officials viewed the letters as political intimidation. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes rejected the implication that his office fails to maintain voter rolls, calling the DOJ’s insinuations “insulting” to county recorders. Fontes stated that Arizona will continue following state law rather than directions stemming from political rhetoric or intimidation, as reported by Democracy Docket.
Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson took to social media to describe the DOJ’s approach as “truly bizarre behavior.”
“Got another love letter this morning from the DOJ sprinkled throughout with threats of criminal prosecution. I’m sure I’m not the only chief election officer of a state who is being targeted for following state and federal laws by resisting DOJ’s demands for private voter data that have thus far been ruled illegal by at least a dozen courts.”
Deidre Henderson, Utah Lt. Gov.
The Conflict Over Voter Roll Data and Purges
This wave of letters follows a broader legal struggle between the Justice Department and state governments over access to voter data. While some states have complied, the DOJ has sued 30 states and Washington, D.C., to seize unredacted voter rolls. To date, 11 federal courts have dismissed those efforts.
A critical point of contention involves the National Voter Registration Act’s 90-day quiet period, which typically prevents systematic voter purges immediately before a federal election. According to Democracy Docket, the DOJ’s attached memo claims this 90-day cutoff “does not apply to the removal of non-citizens who were never eligible to register in the first place.”
This interpretation directly challenges existing authority from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. If the DOJ’s position prevails, it could allow citizenship-based purges to occur shortly before an election, potentially leaving eligible voters with little time to correct wrongful removals.
The Scale of Noncitizen Voting
The administration’s focus on noncitizen voting contrasts with data from election officials and conservative research groups. The Heritage Foundation has found that noncitizen voting is an increasingly small problem.
In Hawaii, for example, the scale of the issue is illustrated by a rare legal case:
Despite these rare occurrences, the Justice Department continues to assert that state election officers, including chief election officers, “could be criminally prosecuted for aiding and abetting” violations of federal voting provisions.
Find more reporting in our News section.
Related reading
