Welcome to the Monday, July 13, 2026, Brew.
By: Lara Bonatesta
Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:
- Six citizenship voting measures on the ballot in 2026 continue second wave of historical trend
- Abdul El-Sayed and Haley Stevens running in the Aug. 4 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Michigan
- The three Democrats running in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District, in their own words
Six citizenship voting measures on the ballot in 2026 continue second wave of historical trend
In 2026, voters in six states will decide ballot measures on citizenship requirements for voting. Each measure would provide that only U.S. citizens may vote in state and local elections. Five are legislative constitutional amendments, and one — in Alaska — is a citizen-initiated state statute. These measures continue the second wave of an historical trend of statewide ballot measures related to citizenship and voting eligibility.
Measures in Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia would define who is eligible, or ineligible, to vote based on citizenship.
In Arizona, the constitutional amendment would provide that “only citizens may register and vote in Arizona elections.” Unlike the constitutions of the other five states, the Arizona Constitution already expressly limits voting to U.S. citizens, stating that “no person shall be entitled to vote ... unless such person be a citizen of the United States.” The constitutional amendment is also broader than the other measures, addressing citizenship, voter identification, campaign finance, and election administration.
The statewide measure in Alaska will be the first on this topic proposed as a statute rather than a constitutional amendment.
Federal law has prohibited noncitizens from voting in elections for president, the U.S. House, and the U.S. Senate since 1996. State constitutions and state and local laws govern eligibility for other elections.
The 2026 measures continue the second wave of an historical trend
The six measures on the 2026 ballot are part of the second of two historical waves of statewide measures concerning citizenship and voting eligibility. From 1894 to 2025, voters considered 35 statewide measures related to citizenship requirements for voting and noncitizen voting. The measures occurred in two distinct periods separated by 91 years.
From 2018 to 2025, voters decided 15 constitutional amendments that added or strengthened citizenship requirements for voting. Voters approved all 15, with an average of 73% voting in favor. Eight of the amendments appeared on the ballot in 2024.
These measures generally did not repeal an existing authorization for noncitizen voting; instead, they changed language such as “every citizen may vote” to “only a citizen may vote” or added an express prohibition on noncitizen voting.
The amendments also preempted state or local governments from later allowing noncitizens to vote. In most states, they did not override an existing law because no locality had already authorized noncitizen voting. The exception was Ohio, where Yellow Springs voters amended the village charter in 2020 to allow noncitizen residents to vote in local elections. However, that charter amendment was not implemented following a directive from Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R).
Between 1894 and 1926, voters decided 20 measures that repealed or restricted constitutional provisions allowing certain foreign-born noncitizens to vote. Voters approved 17 of the measures, or 85%. In each state where voters initially rejected a measure — Missouri, Nebraska, and Texas — voters approved a similar proposal within the following several years. Three measures during this period combined the elimination of noncitizen voting with provisions granting women the right to vote.
During these years, voters considered measures that removed or restricted state constitutional provisions allowing certain foreign-born noncitizens to vote. The people affected were noncitizens who had formally declared their intention to become U.S. citizens but had not completed the naturalization process.
In a 2022 Journal of Policy History article titled “Voters in a Foreign Land: Alien Suffrage in the United States, 1704–1926,” Alan Kennedy described noncitizen voting as widespread in early U.S. elections. He wrote that “all thirteen original states offered noncitizens some form of suffrage by 1800” and that, by that year, “voting by landed, white, male noncitizens was legal in many states.” He noted that state constitutions often used terms such as inhabitant or freeman rather than citizen when describing suffrage. According to Kennedy, “frontier territories with statehood inclinations lured immigrants with promises of state citizenship and voting rights.” These jurisdictions generally required immigrants to declare their intention to become citizens before voting. By 1880, “more than one-third of the states” allowed white male declarant noncitizens to vote.
The final statewide authorization for noncitizen voting, in Arkansas, ended in 1926. No statewide measures added or changed citizenship requirements for voting between 1926 and 2018.
Across both historical waves, statewide measures moved in the same general direction — toward limiting voting to U.S. citizens. No statewide measure proposed granting or expanding voting for noncitizens.
Local measures have moved in the opposite direction
While statewide measures have moved toward limiting voting to U.S. citizens, contemporary local ballot measures have moved in the opposite direction, proposing to authorize or expand noncitizen voting.
From 1991 through 2025, voters decided 18 local measures proposing to authorize or expand noncitizen voting in municipal, county, or school elections. Nine were approved, and nine were defeated.
As of July 8, no local noncitizen-voting measures are certified for the ballot in 2026.
Click here to read more about this year’s ballot measures related to citizenship requirements for voting.
Abdul El-Sayed and Haley Stevens running in the Aug. 4 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Michigan
Abdul El-Sayed (D) and Haley Stevens (D) are running in the Aug. 4 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Michigan. State Sen. Mallory McMorrow (D) suspended her campaign on July 5.
Two-term incumbent Gary Peters (D) is not running for re-election. Crain's Detroit Business' David Eggert said the primary is "Michigan’s first truly competitive Democratic Senate primary in 32 years."
El-Sayed is a public health administrator who ran for governor in 2018. El-Sayed completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey. In his survey response, El-Sayed wrote, "I didn't set out to be a politician; I trained as a doctor, but saw how broken politics were making people sick. Our healthcare system itself is part of the problem. We need Medicare for All." U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) endorsed El-Sayed.
Stevens was elected to the U.S. House in 2018. She previously worked in the private sector and as chief of staff to the U.S. Auto Rescue Task Force during President Barack Obama’s (D) administration. Stevens’ campaign website said, "Haley’s running for Senate to continue to fight for Michiganders and our economy while standing up to the Trump-Musk chaos agenda. When elected, she will fight to lower costs, protect the benefits that Michiganders paid into and earned over a lifetime of work, and defend our personal freedoms." U.S. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) endorsed Stevens.
As of July 2026, major election forecasters rated the general election a toss-up. The last Republican to win a U.S. Senate election in Michigan was Spencer Abraham in 1994. In 2024, Donald Trump (R) defeated Kamala Harris (D) 49.7%–48.3% in the presidential election in Michigan, and Elissa Slotkin (D) defeated Mike Rogers (R) 48.6%–48.3% in the senatorial election.
Click here to learn more about the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in Michigan. Also, if you're a Michigan voter, check out our Sample Ballot Lookup here to prepare for Election Day.
The three Democrats running in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District, in their own words
Chris Armstrong, Fred Clark, and Ginger Murray are all running in the Aug. 11 Democratic primary for Wisconsin's 7th Congressional District. The district, located in northern Wisconsin, is one of 57 open U.S. House seats this year. Incumbent Tom Tiffany (R), who first took office in 2020, is running for governor.
The general election in the district is not expected to be competitive, with major election forecasters rating it safe/solid Republican. In 2024, Tiffany defeated Kyle Kilbourn (D) 63.6% to 36.4%. Consequently, the Republican primary has featured satellite spending from major Republican donors Dick and Liz Uihlein and endorsements from President Donald Trump (R) and several members of Congress.
However, in the quieter Democratic primary, all three candidates have completed Ballotpedia’s Candidate Connection Survey, telling voters who they are, why they are running, and what they hope to achieve in office.
Armstrong is an IT consultant and local organizer. In his survey, he wrote, “My job as an Enterprise Architect is to bring together disparate groups of stakeholders, work to a common understanding of the problem, and then collaborate to come up with the optimal solution that best meets the needs of everyone, in the face of overwhelming complexity and a continually changing landscape. In April 2025, I started my campaign to take the fight to Congress.” In his survey, Armstrong also said he would introduce Articles of Impeachment against Trump and his cabinet.
Clark was a member of the Wisconsin Assembly from 2009 to 2015 and is the owner of Clark Forestry, Inc. He previously worked as a service forester and consultant with the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and as a forest ecologist for The Nature Conservancy. In his survey, Clark wrote, “Now more than ever, people across the political spectrum want our elected representatives to represent ALL of us, not the billionaires and elites whose influence captures politicians of both parties… Fred Clark will become part of a new majority of leaders in Congress who will stand up, represent their communities, and do the work we expect from our elected representatives.”
Murray is an attorney. Her experience includes being the city attorney in Crandon, town attorney for Laona, Family Court Commissioner and department head in Forest and Oneida Counties. In her survey, Murray wrote, “As a lawyer, I demand enforcement of the law, no matter who you are.” She also wrote that she would “produce policies that promote affordability for the middle class and small businesses.”
Click here to learn more about the Democratic primary in Wisconsin’s 7th Congressional District. Also, if you're a Wisconsin voter, check out our Sample Ballot Lookup here to prepare for Election Day.
