Ohio Refers Over 1,200 Alleged Voting Irregularities to DOJ; More Than 1,000 Appear to Be Noncitizen Registrations
Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose said his office referred more than 1,200 alleged voting irregularities to the U.S. Department of Justice, including over 1,000 apparent noncitizen registrations and 167 individuals who reportedly cast federal ballots since 2018.
Key takeaways
- 1,084 cases flagged as apparent noncitizen voter registrations by Ohio’s Election Integrity Unit.
- 167 individuals are reported to have cast ballots in federal elections since 2018.
- More than 1,200 referrals (including 135 other suspected unlawful voting cases) have been sent to the Department of Justice.
Main story
Overview and announcement
Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose announced that his office’s Election Integrity Unit has referred over 1,200 alleged voting irregularities to the U.S. Department of Justice for potential prosecution. The state described the majority of the referrals as apparent noncitizen registrations, and public statements from the office frame the effort as part of protecting election integrity and ensuring “every eligible voter’s voice is heard.”
The initial reporting and summaries are available via media coverage and a state announcement; see Fox News and a Hoodline summary for the state’s announcement and media coverage.
Investigation and methods
Ohio’s Election Integrity Unit used a cross-check process that matched state voter rolls with other records to identify potential problems. Officials matched voter registration records with the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles (BMV) documentation and procedures and consulted federal immigration databases when available. When a person’s citizenship could not be verified through those matches, the state sent notices requesting proof. If recipients did not respond after two notices, cases were moved to further review or referred to federal authorities.
“The checks are necessary so every eligible voter’s voice is heard,” the state said, urging accountability for anyone who “tries to cheat the system.”
What the numbers mean — and what they do not
State officials describe the cases as “apparent” or “alleged” noncitizen registrations, reflecting that the findings come from record matches rather than criminal convictions. All referrals have been forwarded to the U.S. Department of Justice, which will review evidence and decide whether to pursue charges or close cases if records are incomplete or further verification confirms eligibility.
Civil rights groups and voting advocates caution that record matches can generate false positives and that the raw counts alone do not establish widespread fraud; plaintiffs in lawsuits note that past enforcement resulted in relatively few prosecutions compared with the number of ballots cast. For reporting on the legal challenges, see Signal Cleveland.
Legal and policy changes driving the checks
Ohio implemented new citizenship verification requirements in 2025 that tightened procedures for registering to vote at BMV transactions. Under the new rules, individuals who register at the BMV and have not previously provided proof of citizenship must submit documentation at the time of registration. Supporters say the changes prevent ineligible registrations through DMV-style transactions; critics argue the rules create additional hurdles for eligible voters. The state’s procedural summary and related documents are available from the Ohio legislature.
Breakdown of alleged improper voting
Beyond the reported noncitizen registrations, state officials listed several other categories of apparent irregularities:
- 99 people appear to have voted in two states in the same federal election. (Fox News)
- 16 cases where individuals allegedly voted twice in Ohio in the same federal election. (Fox News)
- 14 instances where ballots appear to have been cast after the registrant’s date of death. (Fox News)
- Four suspected ballot-harvesting cases and two registrations tied to unlawful residences. (Fox News)
Reactions and lawsuits
Supporters of the checks, including Secretary LaRose, describe the referrals as routine enforcement to keep voter rolls accurate and deter fraud. Opponents — including civil rights organizations — have filed lawsuits challenging the verification law, arguing it will disenfranchise eligible voters by imposing documentary burdens that fall disproportionately on women, the elderly, students, and rural residents. See reporting on the lawsuits at Signal Cleveland.
Broader context: national trend and trade-offs
Ohio’s use of federal systems (including the federal SAVE system referenced by officials) and cross-database matching is part of a national trend toward more rigorous voter list maintenance. Experts differ: some say federal database checks can improve accuracy, while others warn that over-reliance on automated matches risks wrongly flagging eligible voters. For an evidence-based framework on list maintenance and the trade-offs between access and integrity, see the Bipartisan Policy Center report.
What happens next
All referrals now sit with the U.S. Department of Justice, which will review the materials and decide whether to open criminal investigations or prosecutions. Some matters may be closed without charges if records are incomplete or subsequent verification confirms eligibility; others could lead to prosecutions if evidence supports criminal conduct. The state emphasized that the referrals reflect administrative review and referral, not final legal determinations. (Fox News)
Implications for Paso Robles, California
Although Ohio’s actions are geographically distant, the policy and practical implications may matter to local officials and voters in Paso Robles and San Luis Obispo County. Key considerations:
- Economic impact: Tighter verification can raise administrative costs; counties may need additional staff or technology to perform matching and manage notices.
- Political consequences: The referrals and legal fights can energize both security-minded and access-minded constituencies; local conservative groups may cite Ohio as a model, while access advocates point to litigation risks.
- Social effects: Stricter checks could produce extra steps for seniors, students, and voters who changed names; community groups may need to assist with documentation.
- Practical advice: Residents should keep voter records current, register early, verify status online, and retain copies of citizenship or identity documents. Local civic groups can prepare outreach, information sessions, or document drives to reduce the risk of eligible voters being wrongly flagged.
Sources and reporting notes
- Fox News: “Ohio uncovers over 1,000 noncitizens appearing registered to vote, sends cases to DOJ for prosecution.”
- Ohio legislature document on citizenship verification procedures.
- Signal Cleveland: reporting on lawsuits challenging Ohio’s verification law.
- Hoodline: summary of the state announcement and referrals to DOJ.
- Bipartisan Policy Center: report on modernizing voter list maintenance.
Reporting for this story relied on the state’s public statements, media reports, and legal filings cited above. The cases described by Ohio are referrals based on database matches and state review; final determinations rest with the U.S. Department of Justice and the courts.
