Votebeat is a nonprofit news organization reporting on voting access and election administration across the U.S. Sign up for Votebeat Michigan’s free newsletter here.
LANSING — Backers of an effort to require new Michigan voters to produce proof of their U.S. citizenship have the go-ahead to begin their petition drive to get the question on the ballot next November as a proposed constitutional amendment.
The bipartisan Board of State Canvassers on Friday unanimously approved a 96-word summary of the proposal that will appear on petitions around Michigan. That starts a 180-day clock for the Committee to Protect Voters’ Rights, a group that’s leading the petition drive, to gather nearly 450,000 valid signatures from registered voters across the state. The group, which also operates under the name “Prove It, Michigan,” has previously challenged state-level expansions to voting rights.
“This works,” Richard Houskamp, chair of the four-person board, said after more than an hour of workshopping the specific language.
Fred Wszolek, spokesperson for the Committee to Protect Voters’ Rights, said the approved language “perfectly describes what we’re trying to do — just trying to ask people to prove their citizenship and prove their identity.”
Proponents of the amendment say requiring proof of citizenship is critical for closing loopholes in Michigan’s elections that could create openings for noncitizens to vote and dilute the voting power of actual citizens.
Republicans in Michigan have rallied around such a requirement, especially following the charges against a foreign student who allegedly cast a ballot that was counted in the November 2024 election, and news that more than a dozen other noncitizens are being investigated for the same offense.
State legislators introduced a resolution in the Michigan House for the amendment, which made it out of committee and is awaiting action on the House floor. Even if it passes the Republican-controlled House — nearly every Republican in the chamber co-sponsored the resolution — it faces long odds in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
In a Gallup poll from just before the general election last year, about 83% of respondents around the country said they were in favor of requiring proof of citizenship when someone registers to vote for the first time.
But implementing such a policy at the state level wouldn’t necessarily be simple. For one thing, it would go beyond the requirements of current federal law, which says new registrants must attest that they are citizens, but don’t have to present documentary proof. (The SAVE Act, which passed the U.S. House earlier this month, aims to introduce such a requirement federally, but it faces obstacles in the Senate.)
States that have tried to enforce documentary proof requirements have run into obstacles in court. That includes Arizona, which maintains a separate voter roll for people who have not provided proof of citizenship — and who can vote only in federal elections — as a result of court rulings.
Election officials and voting rights groups across Michigan have criticized the proposal as potentially disenfranchising voters. Because the proposal does not name the specific documents a voter could use to prove their citizenship, several groups have cited concerns that women who changed their names after marriage might struggle to prove their citizenship, along with voters who may lack documentation for a variety of reasons.
Aghogho Edevbie, the deputy secretary of state who is running for secretary of state in next year’s election, has likened proof of citizenship requirements to a poll tax, arguing that the expense and effort involved in getting proper documentation pose an unfair barrier to certain voters.
Republicans have dismissed that allegation, and Rep. Bryan Posthumus, the majority floor leader and the main sponsor of the legislative proposal, has said he would not support any requirement that does not allow women who changed their names upon marriage to easily prove their citizenship.
Houskamp, the chair of the canvassers board, said he had heard concerns about the potential effect of the proposal on married women from his married daughters and granddaughters, but he stopped short of criticizing the petition summary.
He emphasized to the crowd gathered for the board meeting that his role was to assess the summary language itself — not to judge the merits of the proposal.
Speaking Friday, Heather Cummings, one of two Democrats on the board, criticized the proposal for revoking rights already granted to Michigan voters.
She ultimately approved the language written with her fellow board members as well as with input from Director of Elections Jonathan Brater, but she made clear she had a lot of concerns over what the proposal could mean if implemented, criticizing even the name of the petition drive organizer.
“It’s fine if we have different ideologies, but I think ... the title of protecting voter rights is very misleading,” she told the attorney representing the group.
The ballot initiative — the most likely way such a proposal will end up before voters next year — still has a long way to go. Petition circulators will have 180 days from approval to gather 446,198 valid signatures of registered voters, a number based on the total votes cast in the last gubernatorial race.
After the signatures are submitted, the state will have to verify them. If enough valid ones are gathered, the question will appear on next fall’s ballot, which is already shaping up to be a crowded one: In 2026, voters will elect a new governor, secretary of state and attorney general of Michigan, as well as a new U.S. senator. There will also be a contentious race for control of the statehouse and an existing ballot question on whether Michigan should hold a constitutional convention and completely rewrite the state’s guiding document.
Hayley Harding is a reporter for Votebeat based in Michigan. Contact Hayley at hharding@votebeat.org.
