Federal arrests of lawful permanent residents in North Carolina have drawn attention to the serious immigration risks associated with unlawful voting and false claims to U.S. citizenship. The key issue for green-card holders is not only whether prosecutors can prove a criminal charge. Immigration authorities may separately consider the underlying conduct under provisions that can place lawful permanent residence and future naturalization at risk.
The cases also come amid broader federal enforcement activity. The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced charges involving 16 noncitizens in North Carolina, New York, and Idaho on October 16, 2026. These are allegations, not findings of guilt. DOJ states that all defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
What happened in North Carolina, and beyond
On October 14 and 15, 2026, federal agents arrested ten noncitizens in North Carolina after charges alleging unlawful voting and false claims of U.S. citizenship. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) described nine of the individuals as lawful permanent residents and one, a 22-year-old from El Salvador, as an “illegal alien.” The DOJ’s North Carolina announcement says the indictments allege false citizenship claims during registration and voting in the 2024 general election.
Some allegations concern elections over many years. For example, Ramona Abreu-Exia is alleged to have voted in eight general elections between 2004 and 2024. The DHS release and DOJ release set out the government’s allegations; neither establishes guilt.
DOJ also reported charges against five lawful permanent residents in New York, including British nationals Vikki Bradt and Samantha Merkle, Bosnian national Suad Sasic, and Canadian nationals Jacques Patry and Paula Stitt. In Idaho, Canadian national Taralynn Bosco was charged in connection with alleged voting in the 2022 general election. Separately, DOJ sued California over its voter list on October 15 and announced additional election-crime charges in New Jersey on October 19.
According to reporting, voter registration records may have been cross-referenced with federal immigration records in identifying some people. Registration can occur through motor-vehicle agencies, where voter-registration questions may appear alongside driver’s-license applications. A person’s registration status and any prior voting activity should be reviewed carefully rather than assumed.
Federal criminal statutes and the pending constitutional challenge
Two federal statutes are central to the current debate:
- 18 U.S.C. § 611 generally prohibits a noncitizen from voting in an election held wholly or partly to elect specified federal officials. A violation carries a fine, imprisonment for up to one year, or both. The statute contains an exception for certain mixed-purpose elections when state or local law permits voting on nonfederal matters and voting is conducted separately.
- 18 U.S.C. § 911 criminalizes falsely and willfully representing oneself as a U.S. citizen. It carries a fine, imprisonment for up to three years, or both.
The North Carolina U.S. Attorney’s Office states that the indictments there also involve 18 U.S.C. § 1015, which addresses false citizenship claims made to register to vote. The applicable statute and maximum penalty depend on the specific charge. A press release or indictment does not establish that the allegations are true.
There is also a significant constitutional development. On October 1, 2026, U.S. District Judge David S. Leibowitz ruled in United States v. Chelsea Michelle Ann Cox, No. 0:25-cr-60249 (S.D. Fla.), that § 611 was unconstitutional as applied to the defendant. The court reasoned that Congress lacked authority to set voter qualifications for federal elections, a power it said rests primarily with the states. The ruling dismissed Cox’s charge; it did not invalidate § 611 nationwide. DOJ appealed to the Eleventh Circuit on October 2. DOJ continues to pursue § 611 cases in other districts.
Immigration consequences can be separate from criminal prosecution
A false claim to U.S. citizenship can have immigration consequences even when the person is not convicted of a crime. Under INA § 237(a)(3)(D), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(3)(D), a noncitizen may be deportable for falsely representing citizenship for a purpose or benefit under federal or state law. The corresponding inadmissibility ground is INA § 212(a)(6)(C)(ii), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C)(ii).
For these immigration grounds, the law does not generally require proof that the person intended to deceive. But it is not accurate to say that every mistaken checkbox automatically establishes the ground. The false representation, the purpose or benefit involved, and the facts surrounding the statement must be evaluated. USCIS describes the analysis in its Policy Manual, Volume 8, Part K, and the Board of Immigration Appeals has held that intent to falsely represent citizenship is not required for deportability under § 237(a)(3)(D).
The separate unlawful-voting ground is INA § 237(a)(6)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(6)(A). It applies to voting in violation of federal, state, or local law. It is not an aggravated-felony provision, and it does not require a criminal conviction as a prerequisite to an immigration case. A narrow exception may apply where both natural or adoptive parents are or were U.S. citizens, the person permanently resided in the United States before age 16, and the person reasonably believed they were a citizen at the time.
The false-claim inadmissibility ground has no general waiver, although the statute provides a narrow exception for certain people meeting the conditions above. USCIS guidance also recognizes that a voluntary, timely retraction may matter in limited circumstances. These rules are fact-specific. Do not attempt to correct a voter record or explain a prior registration without first obtaining legal advice.
Naturalization is also affected
False citizenship claims, unlawful voter registration, and unlawful voting can affect the good-moral-character determination for naturalization under INA § 101(f), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f). USCIS identifies these acts as potential conditional bars during the applicable statutory period, generally five years before filing and through the naturalization decision, or three years for certain spouses of U.S. citizens. USCIS may consider reliable evidence even if no criminal charge or conviction exists.
However, unlawful voting and false claims are not themselves automatic permanent statutory bars to good moral character. USCIS distinguishes conditional bars from permanent bars, which include specified offenses such as murder and certain aggravated-felony convictions. A removal proceeding or order can separately prevent naturalization while it remains pending or in effect. See the USCIS naturalization guidance on unlawful voting and false claims.
A dismissed criminal case therefore does not necessarily resolve the immigration issue. Criminal and immigration proceedings use different statutes and procedures, and immigration authorities may assess conduct independently. At the same time, an arrest or charge alone does not automatically cancel a green card or establish removability.
Practical steps for green-card holders and advisers
Green-card holders should take the following precautions:
- Do not register to vote or claim U.S. citizenship on a government form. Read citizenship questions carefully, including on DMV or motor-voter forms.
- If you discover that you are registered, do not vote. Consult an immigration lawyer before contacting election officials or asking to change a record.
- If HSI, the FBI, or another investigator contacts you, request counsel before answering questions. Do not provide false information or destroy records.
- Preserve relevant documents. Keep copies of registration forms, agency notices, and any communications about voting eligibility.
- Obtain legal advice before applying for naturalization if you have ever registered or voted while a noncitizen, or if you are uncertain what a form represented.
Employers and HR professionals should note that these arrests do not change Form I-9 procedures. They do not create new reverification duties. Employers should continue to follow existing Form I-9 requirements and avoid taking action based solely on an employee’s citizenship or immigration status.
Speak with an immigration lawyer about your circumstances
The potential immigration consequences of unlawful voting or a false claim to U.S. citizenship depend on the specific forms, statements, election, dates, and available evidence. Blasingame Law LLC provides personalized guidance in naturalization, family immigration, and workforce compliance. Review our immigration services or contact the firm to discuss your situation.
This article provides general legal information, not legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship. Outcomes depend on individual facts and applicable law. Consult a qualified immigration lawyer before taking action.
