2026年10月3日 美国东部时间上午8:00 / 福克斯新闻网
美国地区法官戴维·莱博维茨驳回了一名牙买加裔女性在2020年大选中投票的指控
作者：伊莱恩·马伦 福克斯新闻
一名由拜登任命的法官被保守派批评者贴上“激进主义法官”的标签，此前他在一桩联邦刑事案件中裁定，联邦政府针对非公民参与选举的法律适用违反宪法。
在一份长达31页的判决书中，佛罗里达州南区美国地区法官戴维·莱博维茨驳回了针对切尔西·考克斯的联邦指控。考克斯是土生土长的牙买加人，尽管并非美国公民，她仍在2020年总统大选中投出了选票。这一判决出台之际，特朗普政府正加紧阻止非公民参与投票，包括通过联邦起诉和核实州选民名册上的公民身份等方式，这引发了与民主党领导的州和投票权组织的法律争端。唐纳德·特朗普总统的选举诚信举措在很大程度上源于他及其盟友认为2020年大选“被窃取”的观点——这一未经证实的主张他至今仍在坚持。
莱博维茨裁定，宪法将确定选举合格选民的权力赋予各州，而非国会，这实际上裁定1996年《非法移民改革和移民责任法》（IIRIRA）中关于将非公民在联邦选举中投票定为犯罪的条款，在适用于考克斯时违反宪法。
“宪法将设定联邦选举选民资格的普遍权力交由各州，且仅交由各州，”莱博维茨在判决书中写道，“这一点从文件文本和1787年制宪会议的辩论中都能清晰看出。”
观看：迈克·李怒斥持续发生的投票错误，大量非公民被发现出现在选民名册上
2022年11月8日，犹他州普罗沃——犹他县司法与健康中心的选民正在投票。经过数月的候选人竞选活动，美国人正在中期选举中投票，以决定全国范围内的激烈选情。（照片：乔治·弗雷/盖蒂图片社）(George Frey/Getty Images)
这一判决遭到了犹他州共和党参议员迈克·李的强烈反对。李是《保护美国选民资格法案》（SAVE法案）的共同发起人，该法案目前在参议院搁置，不太可能在中期选举前通过。
“这项荒唐的判决肯定会被推翻，”李在X平台上写道，“但它暴露了真相：民主党人假装我们不需要SAVE法案，因为非公民投票本来就是非法的……而激进主义法官却试图摧毁禁止非公民投票的法律！”
美国推进自由计划的高级法律研究员汉斯·冯·斯帕科夫斯基同意，莱博维茨的判决很可能会被第十一巡回上诉法院“驳回”。
“戴维·莱博维茨法官关于禁止外国人投票的联邦法律违宪的观点显然是错误的，”斯帕科夫斯基告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，“诚然，各州有权设定联邦选举中合格选民的公民资格标准。但他忽略了一个事实，即在第一条第八款中，国会拥有完全的入籍管辖权。”
斯帕科夫斯基表示，宪法赋予国会决定非公民如何入境以及在入境后可从事哪些活动的权力。
“这赋予联邦政府禁止外国人投票或以任何其他方式参与民主进程的权力，”斯帕科夫斯基说。
国务院考虑共享护照记录以核查选民公民身份
据路透社报道，超过3万名非公民被发现出现在美国选民名册上，犹他州共和党参议员迈克·李正呼吁人们抵制对《保护美国选民资格法案》的阻挠。(斯特凡尼·雷诺兹-普尔/盖蒂图片社)
斯帕科夫斯基援引了2011年的布卢曼诉联邦选举委员会案，该案由时任法官布雷特·卡瓦诺撰写判决意见，后来被最高法院简要维持原判，该案 upheld了对外国国民竞选支出的限制。该判决意见称，政府可以将非公民排除在与民主自治相关的活动之外。
“最高法院长期以来一直认为，政府（联邦、州、地方）可以将外国公民排除在美国民主自治相关的活动之外，”卡瓦诺写道，“例如，最高法院已经裁定，政府可以禁止外国人投票、担任陪审员、担任警察或缓刑官员，或在公立学校任教。”
不过，布卢曼诉联邦选举委员会案涉及的是竞选捐款和支出，而非因投票引发的联邦刑事起诉。
霍尔茨曼·沃格尔律师事务所的合伙人安希谢克·坎比尔表示，如果联邦政府在上诉中没有胜诉，他会感到“惊讶”。
坎比尔援引了俄勒冈州诉米切尔案，在该案中，最高法院裁定政府有权设定联邦选举中的投票年龄，这属于选民资格范畴。
“因此，最高法院曾在某个案例中认定，联邦政府在某些情况下有权监管部分选民资格，但这位法官的解读方式把一切都搞乱了，”坎比尔告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。
莱博维茨驳回了联邦政府提出的宪法赋予国会全面监管移民和非公民事务的论点。
尽管他承认国会对移民和非公民事务拥有“广泛且毋庸置疑的权力”，但他表示，这些权力并非“一系列空白支票”，不能凌驾于宪法将选民资格权限定给各州的“根本性宪法约束”之上。
这位法官还驳回了联邦政府对《选举条款》的援引，该条款允许国会规范各州举办联邦选举的方式，包括通过法律打击选民欺诈。莱博维茨表示，涉案法案并非旨在规范选举程序或防止欺诈，而是通过确定谁有投票权，创设了一项联邦选民资格标准。
订阅获取政治新闻简报
尽管莱博维茨裁定联邦政府不能继续起诉切尔西·考克斯，但佛罗里达州仍有权提起州级指控。
点击此处下载福克斯新闻APP
乔·拜登总统于2024年提名莱博维茨担任联邦法官。参议院以64票赞成、33票反对的两党投票结果确认了这一提名，当时的佛罗里达州共和党参议员马可·卢比奥也投了赞成票。周四的这一判决是他迄今为止在法庭上作出的最具政治影响力的裁决。
伊莱恩·马伦是福克斯新闻数字频道和福克斯商业频道的记者，报道全国政治新闻。
‘Activist judge’ rules Congress cannot bar noncitizens from voting in federal elections
October 3, 2026 8:00am EDT / Fox News
U.S. District Judge David Leibowitz dismissed charges against a Jamaican-born woman who voted in the 2020 election
By Elaine Mallon Fox News
A Biden-appointed judge is being labeled an “activist judge” by conservative critics after ruling that the federal government’s application of a law barring noncitizens from voting in elections violates the Constitution in a federal criminal case.
In a 31-page ruling, U.S. District Judge David Leibowitz of the Southern District of Florida dismissed federal charges against Chelsea Cox, a woman originally from Jamaica who voted in the 2020 presidential election, despite not being a U.S. citizen. The ruling comes as the Trump administration has intensified efforts to prevent noncitizens from voting, including through federal prosecutions and attempts to verify citizenship on state voter rolls, sparking legal battles with Democratic-led states and voting-rights groups. President Donald Trump’s election integrity efforts have been driven in large part by his and his allies’ belief that the 2020 election was “stolen” — an unproven claim he continues to maintain.
Leibowitz ruled that the Constitution gives states — not Congress — the authority to determine who qualifies to vote in elections, effectively ruling that a provision of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) criminalizing noncitizen voting in federal elections is unconstitutional as applied to Cox.
“The Constitution commits to the States, and the States alone, the general power to set voter qualifications in federal elections,” Leibowitz wrote in his ruling. “This is clear from both the text of the document and the debates at the Constitutional Convention in 1787.”
WATCH: MIKE LEE EXPLODES ON VOTING ERROR THAT ‘KEEPS HAPPENING’ AS HUGE NUMBER OF NONCITIZENS FOUND ON ROLLS
PROVO UT – NOVEMBER 08: Voters cast their ballots at the Utah County Justice and Health center on November 8, 2022 in Provo, Utah. After months of candidates campaigning, Americans are voting in the midterm elections to decide close races across the nation. (Photo by George Frey/Getty Images)(George Frey/Getty Images)
The ruling garnered sharp blowback from Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who is co-author of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which is currently being stalled in the Senate and unlikely to be passed before the midterm elections.
“This insane ruling will certainly be overturned,” Lee wrote on X. “But it gives the game away: Democrats pretend we don’t need the SAVE Act because non-citizen voting is already illegal… while activist judges try to destroy laws banning non-citizens from voting!”
Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow with Advancing American Freedom, agreed that Leibowitz’s ruling will most likely be “squashed” by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
“Judge David Leibowitz’s opinion that the federal law barring aliens from voting is unconstitutional is patently wrong,” Spakovsky told Fox News Digital. “It is true that states have the constitutional authority to set the qualifications of citizens who are eligible as voters in federal elections. But he ignores the fact that in Article I, Section 8, Congress is given 100% authority over naturalization.”
Spakovsky said the Constitution gives Congress authority to decide how noncitizens enter the country and what activities they may engage in once here.
“That gives the federal government the authority to ban aliens from voting or otherwise in any way participating in the democratic process,” Spakovsky said.
STATE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERS SHARING PASSPORT RECORDS FOR VOTER CITIZENSHIP CHECKS
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, is calling out resistance to the SAVE America Act after Reuters reported that more than 30,000 noncitizens were discovered on U.S. voter rolls.(Stefani Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images)
Spakovsky pointed to Bluman v. FEC , a 2011 decision written by then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh and later summarily affirmed by the Supreme Court, which upheld restrictions on foreign nationals’ campaign spending. The opinion said the government may exclude noncitizens from activities tied to democratic self-government.
“The Supreme Court has long held that the government (federal, state, local) may exclude foreign citizens from activities that are part of the democratic self-regulation in the United States,” Kavanaugh wrote. “For example, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government may bar aliens from voting, serving as jurors, working as police or probation officers, or teaching at public schools.”
However, Bluman v. FEC involved campaign contributions and expenditures, not a federal criminal prosecution for voting.
Anhishek Kambil, a partner at Holtzman Vogel Law Firm, said he’d be “surprised” if the federal government did not prevail in its appeal.
Kambil pointed to Oregon v. Mitchell, in which the Supreme Court ruled the the government had the authority to set voting age in federal elections, which would be a voter qualifier.
“So the Supreme Court has held, in an instance, that there is federal government authority to regulate in certain instances some types of qualifications of voters, but the way that this judge read it kind of made everything a mess,” Kambil told Fox News Digital.
Leibowitz rejected the federal government’s argument that the Constitution grants Congress total authority over regulating immigration and noncitizens.
President Donald Trump arrives to host a dinner in the Rose Garden of the White House on Sept. 2, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Trump invited Republicans running in competitive races ahead of the November elections.(Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
DHS APPROVES PLAN TO VERIFY VOTER CITIZENSHIP, MONITOR MAIL BALLOTS AS TRUMP PUSH INTENSIFIES
While he acknowledged that Congress has “broad, undoubted power” over immigration and noncitizens; he said those powers are not “a series of blank checks” and cannot override the Constitution’s “foundational constitutional constraints” assigning voter-qualification authority to the states.
The judge also rejected the federal government’s reliance on the Elections Clause, which allows Congress to regulate how states conduct federal elections, including by passing laws to combat voter fraud. Leibowitz said the statute at issue was not designed to regulate election procedures or prevent fraud but instead created a federal voter qualification by determining who could vote.
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
While Leibowitz ruled that the federal government cannot continue prosecuting Chelsea Cox, Florida would still have the authority to bring state charges.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
President Joe Biden nominated Leibowitz to the federal bench in 2024. The Senate confirmed him, 64-33, in a bipartisan vote, with then-Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., voting in favor. Thursday’s ruling is his most politically consequential decision from the bench to date.
Elaine Mallon is a writer for Fox News Digital and Fox Business covering national politics.
发表回复