Judge strikes down federal noncitizen voting law, threatening DOJ's enforcement push

Key points

• U.S. District Judge David Leibowitz ruled in a 31-page opinion that 18 U.S.C. § 611, the federal law banning noncitizen voting, is unconstitutional as applied to defendant Chelsea Cox.
• Leibowitz determined that the U.S. Constitution reserves the power to set voter qualifications for the states, not Congress, citing the Elections Clause and the 17th Amendment.
• The Justice Department has appealed the decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, with a notice of appeal filed on October 2, 2026.
• The ruling does not invalidate the statute nationwide or make noncitizen voting legal in Florida, where state law still prohibits it, but it could undermine dozens of pending federal prosecutions.
• The Trump administration has charged at least 60 people with 'voting by an alien' since January 2025, with 16 new charges announced on October 6, 2026.
• Conservative critics, including Senator Mike Lee and Heritage Foundation advocate Hans von Spakovsky, have called the ruling 'insane' and 'patently wrong,' arguing Congress has authority over naturalization and federal election integrity.

Background

This ruling comes amid a broader legal and political battle over election integrity and voting access in the lead-up to the November 2026 midterm elections. The Trump administration has pursued multiple initiatives to restrict voting, including a national mail-voting plan that has faced significant litigation and temporary injunctions. The administration's focus on noncitizen voting has been a high-profile component of its election integrity agenda, despite most elections experts describing such voting as rare. The current case is part of a series of legal challenges to federal election laws, with the Supreme Court previously halting efforts to restrict mail-in voting but leaving the ultimate legality undecided. The ruling by Judge Leibowitz, a Biden appointee confirmed with bipartisan support, adds to the growing tension between federal and state authority over election administration.

How outlets are covering it

The sources present a range of perspectives on the ruling and its implications. Politico frames the decision as a potential 'crash' for the administration's enforcement campaign, emphasizing the shaky legal foundation of the 'voting by aliens' statute. The Miami Herald provides a detailed account of the legal arguments, highlighting Judge Leibowitz's reliance on the Constitution's text and structure, and notes the Justice Department's appeal. CBS News focuses on the practical impact, noting that the ruling could dent the DOJ's push but does not affect other election crimes, and includes the perspective of Cox's attorney, who expressed relief. Al Jazeera emphasizes the broader context, noting that the ruling underscores state jurisdiction over voter qualifications and that most noncitizen voters are lawful permanent residents who registered by mistake. Conservative voices, as reported by the Miami Herald and CBS News, criticize the ruling as 'insane' and 'patently wrong,' arguing that Congress has constitutional authority to safeguard federal elections. The sources also highlight the distinction between federal and state law, with all agreeing that the ruling does not make noncitizen voting legal in Florida but could limit federal prosecutions.

Why it matters

The ruling has significant implications for the Trump administration's election integrity agenda and the broader legal landscape surrounding voting rights. If upheld, it could undermine dozens of pending federal cases and potentially reach the Supreme Court, setting a precedent for the division of power between Congress and the states in election matters. The decision also highlights the tension between federal and state authority over voter qualifications, with the ruling reinforcing the principle that states, not Congress, have the primary power to set voting requirements. This could have broader implications for other federal election laws and the administration's efforts to restrict voting ahead of the 2026 midterms. The case also underscores the political and legal risks of aggressive enforcement actions, with the administration's reliance on a rarely used federal statute now facing a major legal challenge.

What to watch

The Justice Department has appealed the ruling to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, with a notice of appeal filed on October 2, 2026. The case could potentially reach the Supreme Court, where the central question will be whether the 1970 decision in Oregon v. Mitchell provides Congress with the constitutional authority to enact 18 U.S.C. § 611. Legal experts predict that the Supreme Court may agree with Judge Leibowitz, but the outcome is uncertain. In the meantime, the ruling could impact dozens of pending federal cases, with at least four other defendants having raised the same constitutional challenge. The Justice Department may also seek to pursue state-level prosecutions, as the ruling does not affect state laws prohibiting noncitizen voting. The administration's broader election integrity agenda, including its mail-voting plan, will likely face continued legal challenges and political scrutiny in the lead-up to the 2026 midterms.