(The Center Square) — When South Carolina voters head to the polls in November, they’ll have the chance to decide on a constitutional amendment codifying that only citizens can vote in elections in the state.
According to the South Carolina State Election Commission, the question will read: “Must Section 4, Article II of the Constitution of this State, relating to voter qualifications, be amended so as to provide that only a citizen of the United States and of this State of the age of eighteen and upwards who is properly registered is entitled to vote as provided by law?”
“An obvious reaction to the 2020 election, the amendment attempts to remove any question as to the legitimacy of the electoral process in South Carolina,” Ryan Waite, vice president of public affairs at Think Big, told The Center Square via email. “It is hard to argue, given the margins of victory in some of these races, that there should not be some mechanism for making sure qualified voters are actually voting.
“Any such action, however, inevitably and disproportionately impacts marginalized communities, mitigating the actual reason for changes like this.”
Nicholas Higgins, associate professor and political science department chair at North Greenville University in Tigerville, said that while the amendment only changes one word, the proposal “alters the meaning of the law in two important ways.”
“First, it potentially opens up … restrictions to citizen voting,” Higgins told The Center Square via email. “The term ‘Every’ citizen makes it clear that laws that restrict citizen voting are presumed unconstitutional under South Carolina’s constitution.”
While no city in South Carolina allows non-citizens to vote, Higgins said the change would clarify that voting cannot be extended to anyone other than U.S. and South Carolina citizens. However, Higgins added that the change could allow legislators to pass laws restricting citizens’ voting.
“Those assessing this change need to ask whether the perceived clarification that does not address any current concerns in S.C. is worth the potential danger of future restrictions that may be passed,” Higgins said. “Further, there is the practical question of why this needs to be an amendment, whereas the legislature can pass the law stating ‘only’ citizens can vote, which would guide and help the phrase ‘every’ in the constitution without altering the fundamental law.”
However, Barry Maher, principal of Barry Maher & Associates and author of Filling the Glass, said that state lawmakers probably have better uses for their time.
“I think it’s wonderful that South Carolina has reached such a state of perfection that the Legislature has nothing else to do but make meaningless changes to requirements—as if non-citizen voting wasn’t already illegal,” Maher told The Center Square via email. “As if it was actually a problem. As if penalties didn’t already make it far too risky for a non-citizen to vote.
“As if thousands of people would risk the chance to stay in this country in return for a microscopic improvement the chances of their supposedly chosen candidates.”
Separately, South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson has filed an amicus brief asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case to confirm that states can make rules governing their elections, such as requiring voters to show proof of citizenship.
