Michigan Voter Citizenship Proposal Falls Short of Required Signatures for November Ballot
A proposed constitutional amendment requiring proof of citizenship and a photo ID to vote in Michigan has fallen short of the signatures needed for certification, according to a Bureau of Elections report released Monday. The initiative, spearheaded by the committee Americans for Citizens Voting, missed the mark after a random sample review determined the petition yielded 612 valid signatures out of 1,000 checked, falling 17 signatures shy of the 629 threshold required under the state’s sampling rules.
The decision marks a major roadblock for the campaign, which reported spending $9.1 million through July 20 to secure a spot on the November ballot. The proposed amendment aims to overhaul state election procedures by mandating that the secretary of state verify the citizenship status of all registered voters, document it, and remove any non-citizens from voter rolls. It would also strip voters of the option to sign an affidavit confirming their identity at the polls instead of presenting a photo ID.
The Bureau of Elections Review and Sampling Methodology
Under sampling procedure developed by the Board of State Canvassers, election officials evaluate petition drives by examining a random 1,000-signature sample drawn from submitted petitions. To achieve certification, petitions must clear a threshold of valid entries. For this drive, Americans for Citizens Voting submitted 750,000 total signatures to the state, aiming to clear the 434,423-signature threshold.
Initial staff reviews by the Bureau of Elections identified 692 valid signatures in the sampled batch. However, following formal challenges filed by opposing groups, a deeper inspection disqualified signatures. Common reasons cited for invalidation included missing signatures, incorrect cities or townships, invalid dates, omitted circulator information, and illegible handwriting.
Paul Jacob, chairman for Americans for Citizens Voting, expressed strong disagreement with the state’s findings. Jacob argued that the organization collected more than enough valid signatures overall and contended that bureau staff incorrectly rejected legitimate entries during the sampling review. We need to make up 17 signatures out of the 1,000-signature random sample and we’re going to do it,
Jacob stated.
Legal Challenges Over Constitutional Abrogation
The signature count was not the only hurdle facing the petition. Promote the Vote Action, a group that spearheaded the formal challenge against the initiative, raised legal questions regarding the petition’s constitutional wording. The challengers argued that Americans for Citizens Voting failed to list all areas of the constitution amended or abrogated (indirectly affected) by the proposed changes.
While the Bureau of Elections report acknowledged the gravity of this legal argument, bureau staff declined to issue a definitive recommendation on the merits of the abrogation challenge. According to the Bureau of Elections report, (Promote the Vote Action’s) abrogation argument raises legal questions pertaining to the meaning of the Michigan Constitution and the impact of the proposed amendments.
The report added that staff does not make a recommendation as to the merits of the abrogation arguments raised in the challenge.
If adopted, the ballot initiative would introduce documentary hurdles for electors. Under the proposed framework, clerks would be prohibited from counting ballots cast by individuals whose citizenship has not been verified, unless those voters present acceptable documentation—such as a birth certificate or passport—within six days following an election.
Next Steps Before the Board of State Canvassers
The elections bureau’s recommendation against certification now heads to the Board of State Canvassers, a bipartisan panel consisting of two Republicans and two Democrats. The board is set to debate the report, reviewing individual disputed signatures and weighing the broader legal arguments before casting a final vote on whether to place the measure before Michigan voters.
As election administrators and campaign lawyers prepare for hearings in Lansing, the future of the proof-of-citizenship initiative hangs in the balance. What are your thoughts on how states should balance ballot access with strict identity verification rules? Share your perspective in the comments below.
