Constitutional Amendment JConstitutional amendment · Put on the ballot by lawmakers
Citizenship required to vote
Explain it like I'm 5
South Dakota already limits voting to citizens. This would write that rule more directly into the state Constitution, like putting an existing rule on a big permanent sign.
Yes vote
The Constitution would expressly disqualify people who are not U.S. citizens from voting in any election.
No vote
The Constitution would not receive this added citizenship language.
The question to ask yourself
Is an explicit constitutional statement useful, or is existing law sufficient?
The case for
- Makes the citizenship requirement explicit in the Constitution.
- Could increase confidence that election rules are clear.
- Creates a constitutional safeguard that is harder to change than ordinary law.
Backed by: Sen. Taffy Howard
The case against
- The state already bars noncitizens from voting, making the change largely redundant.
- It does not create a new enforcement system or address a documented existing problem.
- Constitutional language can be harder to revise if future details need correction.
Opposed by: Rep. Erik Muckey
- Money
- No direct cost or tax effect was identified.
- Don't be misled
- It is misleading to say this newly prevents noncitizens from voting, because current state and federal rules already do so.