由拜登任命的一名法官在一宗联邦刑事案件中裁定，联邦政府适用一项禁止非公民在选举中投票的法律违反宪法后，保守派批评人士称其为“激进法官”。
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.
在一份长达31页的裁决中，佛罗里达州南区联邦地区法官戴维·莱博维茨驳回了针对切尔西·考克斯的联邦指控。考克斯原籍牙买加，尽管并非美国公民，她仍在2020年总统选举中投了票。这一裁决出台之际，特朗普政府正加大力度阻止非公民投票，包括提起联邦刑事诉讼，以及试图核查各州选民名册所列人员的公民身份，从而与民主党主导的州和投票权组织引发法律纠纷。
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.
特朗普总统为维护选举完整性所作的努力，在很大程度上源于他及其盟友坚信2020年大选“被窃取”。这一说法未经证实，但他至今仍坚持这一主张。
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.
莱博维茨裁定，宪法将决定谁有资格在选举中投票的权力赋予各州，而非国会。这实际上意味着，《1996年非法移民改革与移民责任法》中将非公民参加联邦选举投票定为犯罪的规定，在适用于考克斯案时违宪。
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.
莱博维茨在裁决中写道：“宪法将设定联邦选举选民资格的普遍权力赋予各州，而且仅赋予各州。从宪法文本以及1787年制宪会议的辩论中，这一点都很清楚。”这一裁决遭到参议员迈克·李（犹他州共和党）的强烈反对。他是《保护美国选民资格（SAVE）法案》的共同提案人。该法案目前在参议院审议受阻中期选举前不太可能获得通过。
"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." 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.
“这项荒谬的裁决肯定会遭到推翻，”李在X上写道。“但它让问题暴露无遗：民主党人假装我们不需要《SAVE法案》，因为非公民投票本来就已经违法……与此同时，一些司法立场激进的法官却试图摧毁禁止非公民投票的法律！”美国自由推进组织高级法律研究员汉斯·冯·斯帕科夫斯基认同这一看法，称莱博维茨的裁决很可能被第十一巡回上诉法院“推翻”。
"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.
“莱博维茨法官认为禁止外国人投票的联邦法律违宪，这一观点显然完全错误，”斯帕科夫斯基告诉《福克斯新闻》数字版。“各州确实拥有宪法授予的权力，可以规定有资格在联邦选举中投票的公民应具备何种资格。但他无视了这样一个事实：宪法第一条第八款赋予国会对入籍事务的绝对权力。”斯帕科夫斯基说，宪法赋予国会权力，决定非公民如何进入美国，以及入境后可以从事哪些活动。
"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.
“这赋予联邦政府权力，可以禁止外国人投票，也可以禁止他们以任何其他方式参与民主进程，”斯帕科夫斯基说。
"That gives the federal government the authority to ban aliens from voting or otherwise in any way participating in the democratic process," Spakovsky said.
国务院考虑共享护照记录以核查选民公民身份 斯帕科夫斯基提到了2011年的布拉曼诉联邦选举委员会案（Bluman v. FEC）。该案由时任法官布雷特·卡瓦纳撰写，最高法院后来简易确认了该判决。判决维持了对外国人竞选支出的限制。判决意见指出，政府可以将非公民排除在与民主自治有关的活动之外。
STATE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERS SHARING PASSPORT RECORDS FOR VOTER CITIZENSHIP CHECKS 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.
最高法院长期以来一直认定，政府（联邦、州和地方政府）可以将外国人排除在美国民主自治所涵盖的活动之外。卡瓦诺写道：“例如，最高法院曾裁定，政府可以禁止外国人投票、担任陪审员、担任警察或缓刑官，或在公立学校任教。”然而，“布卢曼诉联邦选举委员会案”涉及的是竞选捐款和支出，而不是针对投票行为的联邦刑事诉讼。
"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.
霍尔茨曼沃格尔律师事务所合伙人安希舍克·坎比尔表示，如果联邦政府在其上诉中未能胜诉，他会感到“意外”。
Anhishek Kambil, a partner at Holtzman Vogel Law Firm, said he'd be "surprised" if the federal government did not prevail in its appeal.
坎比尔提到了“俄勒冈州诉米切尔案”。在该案中，最高法院裁定政府有权规定联邦选举中的投票年龄，而投票年龄将构成选民资格条件。
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.
坎比尔告诉福克斯新闻数字频道：“因此，最高法院曾在一个案例中认定，联邦政府在某些情况下有权对某些类型的选民资格条件进行监管，但这位法官对判决的理解却把一切都搅乱了。”
"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.
莱博维茨驳斥了联邦政府关于宪法授予国会在监管移民和非公民方面拥有完全权力的主张。
Leibowitz rejected the federal government's argument that the Constitution grants Congress total authority over regulating immigration and noncitizens.
随着特朗普相关推动的加剧，国土安全部批准核实选民公民身份、监控邮寄选票的计划 尽管他承认，国会在移民和非公民事务方面拥有“广泛且毋庸置疑的权力”，但他说，这些权力并非“一张张空白支票”，也不能凌驾于宪法将选民资格认定权交给各州的“根本性宪法约束”之上。
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.
法官还驳回了联邦政府援引《选举条款》的做法。该条款赋予国会规范各州举行联邦选举方式的权力，包括通过法律来打击选民欺诈行为。莱博维茨指出，涉案法规的初衷并非规范选举程序或防止欺诈，而是旨在通过界定具备何种条件的人才能投票，从而确立联邦层面的选民资格标准。
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.
欢迎。虽然莱博维茨裁定联邦政府不得继续对切尔西·考克斯提起诉讼，但佛罗里达州仍有权对其提出州级指控。
While Leibowitz ruled that the federal government cannot continue prosecuting Chelsea Cox, Florida would still have the authority to bring state charges.
2024年，乔·拜登总统提名莱博维茨担任联邦法官。随后参议院以64票赞成、33票反对的跨党派投票结果批准了这一任命，时任佛罗里达州共和党参议员马尔科·鲁比奥也投下了赞成票。周四的这项裁决堪称莱博维茨任职以来最具政治影响力的一项司法决定。
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.