Immigration Law
Short Answer: Generally, a noncitizen should not register to vote or vote in a federal election, and most state elections are also restricted to U.S. citizens. Unlawful voting can make a noncitizen inadmissible or removable, while falsely claiming U.S. citizenship during voter registration can create a separate and potentially even more serious immigration problem. There are narrow statutory exceptions and some jurisdictions permit noncitizens to participate in certain local elections, so the exact registration, election, and circumstances matter.
I have seen immigration problems begin with something that seemed completely unrelated to immigration: a driver's license transaction, a voter-registration form, or someone helping a noncitizen complete paperwork.
The problem may not surface for years. It often comes to light when the person applies for a green card or citizenship and USCIS asks whether the applicant has ever registered to vote, voted, or claimed to be a U.S. citizen.
At that point, simply saying "I didn't know" may not resolve the issue. The immigration consequences depend on exactly what happened, what the person signed, what election was involved, and what federal or state law required.
The stakes have also increased. USCIS has strengthened its policy concerning unlawful voter registration, unlawful voting, and false claims to U.S. citizenship in naturalization cases, and the agency has stated that it will issue Notices to Appear in appropriate unlawful-voting and false-citizenship-claim cases.
The Immigration and Nationality Act contains specific grounds addressing unlawful voting.
INA § 212(a)(10)(D)(i) makes a noncitizen inadmissible if the person voted in violation of a federal, state, or local constitutional provision, statute, ordinance, or regulation. INA § 237(a)(6)(A) similarly makes a noncitizen deportable for unlawful voting.
These provisions can affect people at very different stages of the immigration process. Someone applying for adjustment of status may face an inadmissibility problem, while a lawful permanent resident can potentially be placed in removal proceedings based on unlawful voting.
The problem can become even more serious if voter registration involved representing oneself as a U.S. citizen.
Many voter-registration applications require the applicant to affirm that he or she is a U.S. citizen. That means a voter-registration problem can potentially create two separate immigration issues.
The first is whether the person actually voted unlawfully. The second is whether the person falsely represented himself or herself to be a U.S. citizen when registering.
INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) makes certain false claims to U.S. citizenship a ground of inadmissibility. INA § 237(a)(3)(D)(i) contains the corresponding deportability provision.
This distinction is extremely important because registration and voting are not the same conduct. A noncitizen may have registered but never voted, or a voter-registration record may have been created without the person understanding how it happened.
That does not mean the registration should be ignored. It means the facts need to be established before reaching a legal conclusion.
Voter registration sometimes occurs in circumstances that are far less straightforward than someone intentionally filling out a voter-registration application.
A registration can potentially arise during a motor vehicle transaction, through another government-agency process, because of a data-entry issue, or through paperwork completed or submitted by someone else. The appearance of a person's name on a voter roll therefore does not, by itself, establish exactly what that person did or intended.
But neither should someone assume that an accidental registration is automatically harmless.
The original voter-registration application may contain a citizenship question, checkbox, signature, or certification. Those details can become critical when USCIS or DHS later evaluates whether the person made a false claim to U.S. citizenship.
That is why I would want to see the actual records before advising someone how to explain the registration.
If a noncitizen discovers that he or she may be registered to vote, the first instinct is often to call the election office and explain what happened.
That can be a mistake.
Before providing a substantive explanation, I generally want to know what the government's records already show. Depending on the jurisdiction, relevant records may include the original paper or electronic registration application, citizenship attestation, signature record, date of registration, source of the application, transmitting agency, available audit information, and voting history.
Those records can answer questions that memory alone cannot.
Was the application completed on paper or electronically? Was the citizenship box checked? Who transmitted it? Is there a signature? Did the person actually cast a ballot? If so, in what election?
The answers can materially change the immigration analysis.
Registration and voting should always be analyzed separately.
A voter-registration record may raise a potential false-citizenship issue depending on how the registration occurred, but it does not establish that the person actually cast a ballot. Conversely, evidence that someone voted requires a separate analysis of whether that vote violated the law governing that particular election.
This distinction matters because INA § 212(a)(10)(D) and INA § 237(a)(6) address voting in violation of law. The underlying federal, state, or local voting law therefore matters.
The government cannot simply skip that part of the analysis.
There is another important qualification that frequently gets lost in warnings about noncitizen voting.
Federal elections are restricted to U.S. citizens, and citizenship is generally required for state elections as well. But some jurisdictions permit qualified noncitizen residents to participate in certain municipal or other designated local elections.
That means the statement "a noncitizen voted" does not necessarily answer the immigration question. You have to determine which election, what the applicable law permitted, and whether the person's participation actually violated a federal, state, or local legal restriction.
A noncitizen who lawfully participated in an election that expressly permitted noncitizen voting is in a very different position from someone who voted in a federal election.
The immigration statutes also contain an important exception that should not be overlooked.
For unlawful voting, INA § 212(a)(10)(D)(ii) and INA § 237(a)(6)(B) provide a narrow exception where each of the person's parents was or is a U.S. citizen, the person permanently resided in the United States before age 16, and the person reasonably believed at the time of voting that he or she was a U.S. citizen.
A similar statutory exception exists for certain false claims to U.S. citizenship under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(II) and the corresponding deportability provision.
These are narrow exceptions. A general statement that "I thought permanent residents could vote" is not the same thing as satisfying the statutory exception.
That distinction became particularly important in the BIA's recent decision in Matter of Lopez Rico.
In July 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals issued Matter of Lopez Rico, 29 I&N Dec. 780 (BIA 2026).
The respondent had been a lawful permanent resident since 2001 and voted in the 2012 presidential election. According to the BIA, the Immigration Judge found that he mistakenly believed he was eligible to vote and did not know that doing so was unlawful.
That did not prevent the BIA from finding him removable.
The Board explained that the federal voting statute at issue did not require proof that the person knew voting was unlawful. The BIA therefore upheld removability under INA § 237(a)(6) despite the Immigration Judge's finding concerning his mistaken belief.
The decision contains another important holding. The BIA expressly held that unlawful voting is a significant adverse factor when deciding whether a person merits discretionary immigration relief.
That means unlawful voting can hurt twice: first as a basis for an immigration violation, and again when an immigration judge decides whether to grant discretionary relief from removal.
Adjustment of status generally requires the applicant to be admissible to the United States.
Because INA § 212(a)(10)(D)(i) makes a person who unlawfully voted inadmissible, an unlawful voting finding can prevent adjustment of status. Unlike some other inadmissibility grounds, the unlawful-voting provision does not contain a general discretionary waiver.
A false claim to U.S. citizenship can independently create an adjustment problem under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(ii). That provision likewise does not have the broad waiver that exists for some ordinary fraud or material-misrepresentation cases under INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(i).
This is why the distinction between ordinary misrepresentation and a false claim to U.S. citizenship matters enormously. They are not interchangeable grounds of inadmissibility.
Potentially, yes.
INA § 237(a)(6)(A) provides that a noncitizen who has voted in violation of federal, state, or local law is deportable. That provision applies to lawful permanent residents as well as other noncitizens who fall within the deportability framework.
A green card therefore does not give someone the right to vote in a federal election.
And as Matter of Lopez Rico demonstrates, the issue is not merely theoretical. The respondent in that case was a lawful permanent resident, DHS charged him with removability based on unlawful voting, and the BIA upheld that removability determination.
Eligibility for relief from removal is a separate question and depends on the person's complete immigration history. But Lopez Rico now makes clear that unlawful voting itself can receive significant negative weight when an immigration judge exercises discretion.
Naturalization is frequently where an old voter-registration issue finally surfaces.
Form N-400 asks questions designed to identify voter registration, voting, and claims to U.S. citizenship. USCIS can investigate those issues when determining whether the applicant satisfies the requirements for naturalization, including good moral character.
USCIS strengthened its guidance on this issue in 2025. Its policy specifically addresses false claims to U.S. citizenship, unlawful voter registration, and unlawful voting in the naturalization context.
The consequences can extend beyond denial of the N-400.
USCIS's current policy states that the agency is affirmatively committing to issuing Notices to Appear to noncitizens who falsely claimed U.S. citizenship or voted in violation of law. In other words, an N-400 filing can potentially uncover an issue that not only prevents naturalization but exposes an existing permanent resident to removal proceedings.
That is why someone with a questionable voter-registration or voting history should understand the issue before filing Form N-400, not after USCIS raises it at the interview.
Intent and knowledge can matter, but not always in the way people expect.
Different immigration provisions have different legal requirements. A false claim to U.S. citizenship requires analysis of whether the person actually made the representation and whether it was made for a purpose or benefit covered by the statute.
Unlawful voting requires a different analysis. As Matter of Lopez Rico illustrates, the BIA has held that a person can be removable for violating the applicable federal voting law even where the Immigration Judge found that the person mistakenly believed he was eligible to vote.
This is one reason I would never evaluate a voter-registration case simply by asking, "Did you know you weren't allowed to vote?"
The better questions are: What exactly did you do? What did you sign? What did the form say? Which election was involved? What law governed eligibility? Did you actually vote? And what do the government's records show?
Do not panic, but do not start trying to create a record before understanding the existing one.
I would generally begin by obtaining the relevant voter-registration and voting records. Preserve any driver's license paperwork, voter-registration cards, election mail, emails, text messages, or other documents that may show how the registration occurred.
Do not discard election materials simply because they are uncomfortable to have. Those documents may later help establish what happened.
I would also be cautious about immediately contacting an election office, voter-registration organization, or government agency with a detailed explanation. A well-intentioned attempt to "fix" the record can create a new written statement before the person or the attorney has even seen the underlying registration documents.
Once the records are available, the events can be separated into the questions that actually matter: Was there a registration? Was there a citizenship representation? Who made it? Was there a vote? Was the person legally permitted to participate in that particular election? And does a statutory exception apply?
Only then can the immigration consequences be evaluated accurately.
If you are not a U.S. citizen, do not register to vote or vote in a federal election. Do not rely on a friend, family member, campaign volunteer, motor vehicle employee, or anyone else telling you that having a green card means you are allowed to vote.
For state and local elections, confirm eligibility before registering or voting because the rules can differ and a limited number of jurisdictions permit noncitizen participation in particular local elections. What matters for immigration purposes is not merely whether someone's name appears on a voter roll, but exactly what occurred and whether it violated the law.
If you are already registered, previously voted, or are unsure whether a voter-registration application was submitted in your name, the safest time to investigate the issue is before filing an I-485, N-400, or another immigration application that requires you to address it.
If you are concerned about voter registration, voting, or a possible false claim to U.S. citizenship and how it may affect your immigration case, contact me at SG Legal Group. These cases are highly fact-specific, and the original registration and voting records often matter more than assumptions about how the registration occurred.
Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws and policies are subject to change, and individual circumstances vary. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a qualified immigration attorney.
Oleg Gherasimov, Esq.
Stay informed with our latest articles and resources.
