Republican push for proof of citizenship to vote proves a tough sell in
the states
[June 04, 2025]
By CHRISTINA A. CASSIDY and NADIA LATHAN
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — President Donald Trump and congressional
Republicans have made it a priority this year to require people to prove
citizenship before they can register to vote. Turning that aspiration
into reality has proved difficult.
Trump’s executive order directing a documentary, proof-of-citizenship
requirement for federal elections has been blocked by a judge, while
federal legislation to accomplish it doesn’t appear to have the votes to
pass in the Senate. At the same time, state-level efforts have found
little success, even in places where Republicans control the legislature
and governor's office.
The most recent state effort to falter is in Texas, where a Senate bill
failed to gain full legislative approval before lawmakers adjourned on
Monday. The Texas bill was one of the nation’s most sweeping
proof-of-citizenship proposals because it would have applied not only to
new registrants but also to the state’s roughly 18.6 million registered
voters.
“The bill authors failed spectacularly to explain how this bill would be
implemented and how it would be able to be implemented without
inconveniencing a ton of voters,” said Anthony Gutierrez, director of
the voting rights group Common Cause Texas.
Voting by noncitizens is rare
Voting by noncitizens is already illegal and punishable as a felony,
potentially leading to deportation, but Trump and his allies have
pressed for a proof-of-citizenship mandate by arguing it would improve
public confidence in elections.
Before his win last year, Trump falsely claimed noncitizens might vote
in large enough numbers to sway the outcome. Although noncitizen voting
does occur, research and reviews of state cases has shown it to be rare
and more often a mistake.
Voting rights groups say the various proposals seeking to require
proof-of-citizenship are overly burdensome and threaten to
disenfranchise millions of Americans. Many do not have easy access to
their birth certificates, have not gotten a U.S. passport or have a name
that no longer matches the one on their birth certificate — such as
women who changed their last name when they married.
Married women who changed names are a particular concern
The number of states considering bills related to proof of citizenship
for voting tripled from 2023 to this year, said Liz Avore, senior policy
adviser with the Voting Rights Lab, an advocacy group that tracks
election legislation in the states.
That hasn’t resulted in many new laws, at least so far. Republicans in
Wyoming passed their own proof-of-citizenship legislation, but similar
measures have stalled or failed in multiple GOP-led states, including
Florida, Missouri, Texas and Utah. A proposal remains active in Ohio,
although Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican, has said he doesn’t want to
sign any more bills that make it harder to vote.
In Texas, the legislation swiftly passed the state Senate after it was
introduced in March but never made it to a floor vote in the House. It
was unclear why legislation that was such a priority for Senate
Republicans – every one of them co-authored the bill -- ended up
faltering.
“I just think people realized, as flawed as this playbook has been in
other states, Texas didn’t need to make this mistake,” said Rep. John
Bucy, a Democrat who serves as vice chair of the House elections
committee.
[to top of second column]
|
Bucy pointed to specific concerns about married women who changed
their last name. This surfaced in local elections earlier this year
in New Hampshire, which passed a proof-of-citizenship requirement
last year.
Similar laws have created confusion
Other states that previously sought to add such a requirement have
faced lawsuits and complications when trying to implement it.
In Arizona, a state audit found that problems with the way data was
handled had affected the tracking and verification of residents'
citizenship status. It came after officials had identified some
200,000 voters who were thought to have provided proof of their
citizenship but had not.
A proof-of-citizenship requirement was in effect for three years in
Kansas before it was overturned by federal courts. The state’s own
expert estimated that almost all of the roughly 30,000 people who
were prevented from registering to vote while it was in effect were
U.S. citizens who otherwise had been eligible.
In Missouri, legislation seeking to add a proof-of-citizenship
requirement cleared a Senate committee but never came to a vote in
the Republican-led chamber.
Republican state Sen. Ben Brown had promoted the legislation as a
follow-up to a constitutional amendment stating that only U.S.
citizens can vote, which Missouri voters overwhelmingly approved
last November. He said there were several factors that led to the
bill not advancing this year. Due to the session’s limited schedule,
he chose to prioritize another elections bill banning foreign
contributions in state ballot measure campaigns.
“Our legislative session ending mid-May means a lot of things die at
the finish line because you simply run out of time,” Brown said,
noting he also took time to research concerns raised by local
election officials and plans to reintroduce the proof-of-citizenship
bill next year.
Complications prompt states to focus on other issues
The Republican-controlled Legislature in Utah also prioritized other
election changes, adding voter ID requirements and requiring people
to opt in to receive their ballots in the mail. Before Gov. Spencer
Cox signed the bill into law, Utah was the only
Republican-controlled state that allowed all elections to be
conducted by mail without a need to opt in.
Under the Florida bill that has failed to advance, voter
registration applications wouldn’t be considered valid until state
officials had verified citizenship, either by confirming a previous
voting history, checking the applicant's status in state and federal
databases, or verifying documents they provided.
The bill would have required voters to prove their citizenship even
when updating their registration to change their address or party
affiliation.
Its sponsor, Republican state Rep. Jenna Persons-Mulicka, said it
was meant to follow through on Trump’s executive order: “This bill
fully answers the president’s call,” she said.
___
Cassidy reported from Atlanta. Associated Press writers Mead Gruver
in Cheyenne, Wyoming; David A. Lieb in Jefferson City, Missouri;
Kate Payne in Tallahassee, Florida; Hannah Schoenbaum in Salt Lake
City; Julie Carr Smyth in Columbus, Ohio; and Isabella Volmert in
Lansing, Michigan, contributed to this report.
All contents © copyright 2025 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
