On a recent Fox News Sunday, Senator Tim Kaine, Virginia Democrat, interviewed with host Shannon Bream, who channeled their conversation to the revelation that some 6,600 non-citizens were registered to vote in New Jersey, but fewer than 400 of those individuals had, in fact, cast ballots in the last election.
Read more Leftist Judges Fighting a Losing Battle
Besides the relevant issue of voter ID, Bream engaged Kaine on the prospect of sharing state voter rolls with federal officials to, presumably, look into whether New Jersey’s disclosure was a proverbial “canary in the coal mine” among states for non-citizens being registered to vote and then actually voting.
Her question stemmed from citing a letter from DHS Secretary Mullin to New Jersey requesting the state turn over voter rolls because a preliminary review showed there may be as many as 35,000 non-citizens registered to vote, a number far above the 6,600 number admitted to by New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill. (Since the Garden State has used automatic voter registration since 2018, the true numbers are likely even higher.) Despite the discrepancies, the governor insisted she will not share her state’s voter rolls with federal officials. It was on this point Kaine clearly answered like a party politician instead of senator with governing responsibilities.
His response began with the bromide that “sharing of information was important,” but followed by saying that “weaponization of [voter] information is a real challenge.” Here, Bream never presses him to explain how the information would be “weaponized,” who would do it, and to what ends. Nor does she pursue asking about instances of prior “weaponization” of voter data to prompt such a concern. Given that interest, has he ever sat down with federal officials to have them explain just how state voter information would be used?
He would go on to use as an example how his home state Virginia opposed efforts by federal officials to obtain voter information because it was “very unclear” how the information would be used. Instead of stopping at “unclear,” could Virginia cooperate with federal officials to work out how that information would be used so as to make it clear? Should professional duties as a senator to govern override any politician’s role to facilitate finding out if states’ voter rolls are compromised by unlawful or mistaken registrations—especially given such discrepancies as found in New Jersey?
Going further, if there are unlawful voter registrations, how many of those registered actually voted in past elections?
To make clear how state voter information would be used, the current administration has offered some broad guidelines. “The most efficient way to ensure the accuracy of our findings is to work collaboratively on identity verification,”” DHS Secretary Mullin wrote. DHS said it is prepared to provide immigration records under federal law to help states determine whether those individuals are eligible to remain on voter rolls.
DHS said it will also use Social Security numbers as another identifier to compare state voter registration records with federal immigration records. Since many noncitizens are legally issued Social Security numbers, including lawful permanent residents, people authorized to work in the United States and certain visa holders, there understandably exists potential for administrative error or outright abuse.
Read more The Mohammunist Manifesto—Rejection of Pluralist or Limited Government
Presently, New Jersey is frankly not alone to not provide federal officials access to their state voter rolls. As of mid-2026, at least 30 states (admittedly mostly “blue”) and Washington D.C., have refused to provide the federal government with full, unredacted voter registration lists, citing state privacy laws and constitutional authority over elections. Judges, so far, have mostly sided with those states. In the latest case, out of D.C., the presiding judge opined that if the DOJ wants the [voter] information, “it needs to lodge that objection with Congress.”
But given what was discovered in New Jersey, should federal officials then be faulted or criticized for seeking to determine if other states’ voter rolls are current, accurate, and contain any evidence of non-citizens being on voter rolls — and actually voting — in numbers deserving close scrutiny or corrective actions?
In our legal system, one question is always before us: “Is it more important to protect innocence or punish guilt?” The American system, grounded in British common law, has long erred on the side of protecting innocence. Often called “Blackstone’s ratio” (after British jurist William Blackstone), it is summed up with his well-known quote: “Better that ten guilty persons escape, than one innocent suffer.”
Since the foundation of our American political system rests on elections, there must be a corresponding principle that decidedly favors and protects the citizen casting their ballot. “Ensuring that U.S. citizens’ votes are not illegally diluted [cancelled] by noncitizens’ votes is of paramount importance,” wrote Harmeet Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, in a letter to Governor Sherrill. That is the law that is the crux of U.S. national election integrity; it is only a citizen who can vote. Any unlawful vote cast translates to an American citizen who is disenfranchised by having their lawful vote negated.
At some point, state and federal officials should — and must — come together to mesh and audit records to ensure the accuracy and currency of voter rolls to hopefully reassure voters in all fifty states that New Jersey’s discovery is the “exception and not the rule.”
Colonel Chris J. Krisinger, USAF (Ret) graduated from the United States Air Force Academy and served in policy advisory positions at the Pentagon and twice at the Department of State. He is a Distinguished Graduate of the Naval War College and was also a National Defense Fellow at Harvard University. Want to continue the discussion? Email: [email protected].
Read more Western resilience and trade policy
Image generated by ChatGPT.