The American Immigration Council is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. The immigration debate remains front and center within state legislatures and city halls across the country. With the midterm elections just around the corner, the American Immigration Council is tracking nine proposed state ballot measures impacting immigrant communities.
Most of these measures are constitutional amendments that cannot easily be undone, making the midterm elections even more important. And the focus of these proposals varies from things like efforts to curb noncitizen voting to increasing the level of immigration enforcement in a state.
2026 Proposed Ballot Measures Impacting Immigrant Communities
| State | Proposed Measure | Type |
| AK | Ballot Measure 3: Requiring that only U.S. citizens may be qualified to vote. | State statute |
| AZ | Proposition 144: Specifying that only U.S. citizens are eligible to register to vote. | Constitutional amendment |
| AR | Issue 1: Specifying that only U.S. citizens may be qualified to vote. | Constitutional amendment |
| CA | Proposition 39: Establishes identification requirements for in-person voting and requires election officials to use “best efforts” to verify citizenship attestations. | Constitutional amendment |
| CO | Amendment 81: Requires local law enforcement to notify the Department of Homeland Security after charges are brought against a person for certain crimes if the person is not lawfully present in the U.S. or their lawful status cannot be determined. | Constitutional amendment |
| ID | HJR 6: Establishes English as the state’s official language. | Constitutional amendment |
| KS | House Concurrent Resolution 5004: Requiring that only U.S. citizens may be qualified to vote. | Constitutional amendment |
| SD | Constitutional Amendment J: Requiring that only U.S. citizens may be qualified to vote. | Constitutional amendment |
| WV | Amendment 1: Requiring that only U.S. citizens may be qualified to vote. | Constitutional amendment |
Noncitizen voting
This year, seven states are considering ballot measures specifying that only a U.S. citizen can vote or requiring election officials to verify voters’ citizenship status. Any state whose measure passes will join a growing list of states that have recently passed similar measures. Currently, 12 states have statutes on the books that require proof of citizenship at some point in the voter registration process.
The federal government has long prohibited noncitizens from voting and, in 1996, made it a crime. Research has repeatedly debunked claims of widespread noncitizen voting. In fact, data from the Heritage Foundation shows that noncitizen voting is extraordinarily rare. Despite these findings and the continued lack of evidence, the Trump administration has persisted in its claims that large numbers of noncitizens vote in the country, including through a March 2026 executive order calling for new systems to verify voters’ citizenship. This has fueled continued efforts to pass ballot measures and related state legislation, including 11 measures in 2026 in eight states mostly focused on requiring proof of U.S. citizenship for voting, use of the System Alien Verification and Entitlement (SAVE) system to check voters’ citizenship, and voter roll reviews to look for noncitizens.
English as the official state language
Meanwhile, the Idaho legislature passed HJR 6, a referral to the 2026 state ballot asking voters to change the state’s constitution to establish English as the state’s official language. This is despite a 2007 bill that had already established English as the state’s official language in statute. The ballot measure would require that, unless required by federal law, English would be the only language used in all public proceedings, public documents, or other public acts of the state.
If HJR 6 passes, Idaho will join 11 other states that have passed English-only policies through ballot measures and remain among the 30 states that have enacted similar provisions through constitutional amendment or state legislation. The full impact on language access policies can vary. Some states with constitutional provisions in place, passed decades ago, have also enacted robust language access policies.
Immigration enforcement
In Colorado, Amendment 81 could unravel years of work to protect immigrant communities and build trust with local law enforcement, including through a 2019 bill limiting information sharing for federal immigration enforcement and a 2025 bill that strengthened data privacy provisions for immigrants.
Amendment 81 would require local law enforcement agencies to notify the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) within 72 hours if they charge someone with a violent crime, or if an individual has a prior felony conviction on their record and the individual is not lawfully present in the United States, or if their lawful status cannot be determined.
Opponents of the measure point out that Colorado law already allows cooperation with federal law enforcement in certain criminal matters. They argue that Amendment 81 would undermine access to due process and the presumption of innocence, because it would apply to individuals charged but not yet convicted of certain crimes. The measure would also apply to anyone with a prior felony who is subsequently charged with any crime, including a traffic offense, misdemeanor, or petty offense. Nationally, as of July 11, 2026, a staggering 70.6% of those detained by ICE have no criminal conviction.
During a September 3 committee hearing of the Legislative Council on ballot measures and the ballot analysis book sent to voters, Colorado House Majority Leader Monica Duran introduced Amendment 1, seeking to clarify that ICE is the federal agency most likely to be contacted under the amendment, despite not being named. “The main agency that conducts immigration enforcement is ICE, and we need to clarify this,” Duran said. “However voters feel about ICE, this will increase their involvement in our state.
With Amendment 81, Colorado joins only 15 other states that have addressed immigrant- or immigration-related issues on their ballot. It is Colorado’s fifth immigrant-related ballot measure, and third this century.
As state lawmakers continue to realize their power to affect immigrants’ safety and well-being through policy decisions, voters should take note, too. All but one of the proposed ballot measures the Council is tracking would make changes to the state’s constitution. This means if a passed policy proves ineffective or harmful, communities could face years of work to repeal it—including having to pursue a second ballot initiative. In a moment when anti-immigrant sentiments are strongly influencing what’s on state ballots, voters should use caution when voting on measures that reflect anti-immigrant sentiment rather than real community needs.
