In a Democratic midterm wave that handed control of Congress to the opposition and produced historic flips in red-leaning territory, voters in five of six states still approved measures explicitly limiting voting in state and local elections to American citizens, thus preventing the tyranny of being ruled overtly by foreigners.
On November 3, 2026, six states voted on citizenship voting requirements. Five passed (Alaska by statute; Arkansas, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia by constitutional amendment). Arizona’s broader Proposition 144 failed. These results continued a multi-year pattern: from 2018 through 2025, voters approved all 15 similar statewide measures, with average support around 73%. After 2026, roughly 20 states have endorsed citizen-only voting via the ballot, according to groups tracking the issue.
The Measures and Results
Approximate results (unofficial, near-complete counts):
– Alaska Ballot Measure 3 (statutory initiative): Approved ~70% (about 143,000 yes to 62,000 no). It states that only a person who is a citizen of the United States may vote in any election. Sponsors, including former Republican legislators, argued the prior wording was unclear.
– Arkansas Issue 1 (constitutional): Approved ~69% (roughly 597,000 yes to 267,000 no). It provides that “Only a citizen of the United States meeting the qualifications of an elector … may vote in an election in this state.” The state constitution already listed citizenship among qualifications; the change strengthens language to cover local elections and preempt municipalities.
– Kansas Citizenship Voting Requirement Amendment (constitutional): Approved ~64% (about 671,000 yes to 383,000 no). It states that no person shall be deemed a qualified elector unless a citizen of the United States. Kansas already restricted voting to citizens by law or constitution; opponents worried the new wording could enable stricter proof-of-citizenship rules later.
– South Dakota Amendment J (constitutional): Approved ~62% (about 184,000 yes to 115,000 no). It disqualifies an individual who is not a citizen of the United States from voting in any election. Proponents described it as closing a potential local loophole.
– West Virginia Citizenship Voting Requirement Amendment (constitutional): Approved ~80% (about 341,000 yes to 88,000 no). It provides that “Only citizens of the state who are citizens of the United States are entitled to vote.” The prior language referred to citizens of the state being entitled to vote.
– Arizona Proposition 144 (broader constitutional amendment): Defeated (~53% no, roughly 1.1 million to 970,000). Beyond citizenship for registration and voting, it required government-issued ID for in-person and mail ballots, banned foreign-national contributions intended to influence elections, and allowed precinct tabulation of ballots. Critics argued the package threatened no-excuse mail voting and access; the citizenship piece alone was not the main flashpoint.
Intent and Context
Federal law already prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections. No state allows noncitizens to vote in statewide elections. Most of the states involved already barred noncitizen voting by statute or constitution. The primary purpose of these measures is to make the restriction explicit, harder to reverse, and binding on local governments who often hold elections as kingdoms unto themselves.
A small number of municipalities (examples in California, Maryland, Vermont, and the District of Columbia) have allowed noncitizens to vote in local races such as school board or municipal elections. Supporters of the 2026 measures argued that without clear statewide preemption, similar experiments could spread. Groups such as Americans for Citizen Voting framed the votes as affirming that “only U.S. citizens should vote in all elections.”
What It Means in a Bad Year for Republicans
The 2026 midterms produced a clear Democratic wave: the party flipped the House and Senate (roughly +7 Senate seats, including first Democratic Senate wins in Kansas since the 1930s and a Senate seat in Texas, plus large House gains). Republicans lost ground across most counties, including in areas that had supported Trump strongly in 2024. High prices, other national issues, and backlash to the administration drove the results.
Yet the citizenship measures passed by comfortable margins in red and mixed states, often with support well above typical Republican baselines. This indicates the principle of citizen-only voting retains broad appeal that is not strictly partisan and immigration is a winning issue for Republicans to rebound with. Voters can and do separate “who gets to vote” from preferences on candidates or other issues. Similar measures have passed consistently for years regardless of the partisan environment.
Practically, the approved amendments lock the restriction into state constitutions (or statute in Alaska), making local noncitizen voting experiments more difficult and requiring future voter approval to reverse. They do not alter federal election rules or create new proof-of-citizenship requirements at the polls by themselves. Arizona’s rejection shows that packaging citizenship language with other election changes (especially those perceived as restricting mail voting) can fail even when standalone versions succeed elsewhere.
In short, while the 2026 election delivered a sharp rebuke to the party in power on many fronts, voters across multiple states reaffirmed that the franchise in state and local elections should remain limited to American citizens. The results add to a growing body of state-level constitutional text on the subject and signal that this particular boundary continues to command majority support even when broader Republican fortunes do not.
