In the lead-up to the November presidential election, officials in Ohio, including Secretary of State Frank LaRose and Attorney General Dave Yost, initiated investigations into alleged voter fraud, primarily targeting individuals suspected of voting without U.S. citizenship. This move aligned with a broader national Republican strategy that heavily emphasized the danger of ineligible voters potentially swaying election outcomes. Attorney General Yost underscored the seriousness of voting as a sacred right, asserting that those who unlawfully vote would face legal consequences. The rhetorical flourish surrounding potential voter fraud, however, starkly contrasted with the subsequent findings of these investigations, which ultimately identified only a handful of cases over a decade amidst millions of ballots cast in Ohio.
Following thorough investigations, LaRose submitted 621 criminal referrals on voter fraud cases to the attorney general’s office. Out of these, only nine individuals were indicted for illegal voting as noncitizens. Remarkably, one of these defendants had already passed away. These numbers present a striking disparity when juxtaposed against Ohio’s population of approximately 8 million registered voters, highlighting how claims of widespread noncitizen voting have not been substantiated by empirical evidence. The ongoing prosecution of these cases showcases that illegal voting incidents are exceedingly rare, not indicative of organized efforts to manipulate elections but rather often involve isolated individuals who acted without malicious intent.
Several specific cases illustrate the complications surrounding voter eligibility in Ohio. One individual, Nicholas Fontaine, a Canadian-born permanent resident who had lived in the U.S. since childhood, was indicted for illegal voting in the 2016 and 2018 elections. Fontaine originally believed he was eligible to vote, mistakenly linking the obligations of registering for the military draft with voting rights. Following his indictment, he expressed shock at the charges, emphasizing that he had voted sincerely, without any indication of wrongdoing during the voting process. Fontaine’s situation underscores the confusion that can arise among permanent residents and their understanding of voting rights, especially when official communications do not clarify their ineligibility.
In addition to Fontaine, two other defendants were uncovered in investigations. Fiona Allen, a Jamaican immigrant who obtained U.S. residency, was charged for voting during the 2020, 2022, and 2023 elections after believing she was eligible. Lorinda Miller, a 78-year-old woman from Canada, also confronted similar charges. Miller entered the U.S. as a child and identified herself through documents from an indigenous tribe that she thought qualified her as a citizen. Both cases illustrate how individuals may inadvertently violate voting laws due to misunderstandings regarding their statuses.
Faith Lyon, the election director for Portage County, acknowledged the limitations local election officials face in verifying every voter’s immigration status. Voter registration processes typically involve a self-reporting system that relies heavily on individuals to accurately indicate their citizenship status. However, as seen in these cases, simply leaving the citizenship question blank can lead to automatic registration and subsequent legal troubles. This raises questions about whether the current voter verification processes are sufficient to prevent unintentional violations, especially for individuals not fully aware of their legal voting statuses.
Experts like Jay Young, from Common Cause, argue that the narrative surrounding voter fraud and illegal voting by noncitizens, particularly immigrants, is misleading and not backed by substantial evidence. The reality is that voting by noncitizens in the United States is incredibly rare, and existing mechanisms to clean voter rolls and the severe penalties for casting illegal ballots underscore the validity of this assertion. Young characterizes the discourse around noncitizen voting as a perpetuated myth that serves to sow distrust in the election system, keeping the public divided and allowing political actors to leverage this narrative to explain away electoral losses. Ultimately, the Ohio cases reflect broader national trends, emphasizing a disconnect between political rhetoric on voting integrity and the actual experiences of individuals caught in the legal crossfire of misunderstanding and unintentional misconduct.