I can't see how it's constitutional.
But I also can't see the supreme Court doing a damn thing about it.
this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2026
35 points (100.0% liked)
politics
28978 readers
2039 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
He said there are “a handful of states in which some local elections openly allow noncitizens to vote” and where local officials have declined to explain how they ensure those noncitizen voters aren’t also voting in federal elections.
The issue of non-citizens voting in local elections has quite an interesting history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-citizen_suffrage_in_the_United_States
Many states let non-citizens vote historically, as long as they met residency requirements. It wasn't until the "wrong" types of people started coming over (like the Irish) in the late 1800's that some states started clamping down on the practice. And, believe it or not, non-citizens voting in Federal elections was not made illegal on the national level until 1997!
Hopefully the Democrats kill it. But if this passes, and the inevitable challenges make it to the SCOTUS, it will be interesting to see this case where the Democrats actually have the founders on their side, and the contortions the SCOTUS goes through to rubber-stamp the act in spite of their Originalism....
Don't forget how long SCOTUS sat on tariffs before making a ruling (only for Donnie Dickhead to get butthurt and impose even more tariffs). If SAVE passes they'll sit on it until well after the damage is done.