Public Comment

Amendment J would amend South Dakota’s Constitution to clarify that an individual must be a United States citizen to be eligible to vote. The measure was placed on the 2026 ballot by the Legislature. Its core effect is constitutional wording about voting eligibility rather than a detailed new voter-identification system. The debate is therefore whether explicit citizen-only language adds useful legal clarity and durability, or whether it constitutionalizes a qualification already addressed elsewhere while potentially inviting future disputes about how citizenship should be verified. A constitutional rule can clarify who is eligible without saying how election officials prove it. Voters should separate the principle of citizen-only voting from later arguments over documents, databases, and ballot procedures.

Should South Dakota’s Constitution explicitly say that only U.S. citizens are eligible to vote?

Overall results

1
58% support · excluded by 21%
7

Keeping procedural details outside the Constitution avoids locking current technology and documents into permanent text.

7

Any verification system should notify eligible voters of mismatches and let them cure problems before a ballot is lost.

2
56% support · excluded by 2%
7

The Constitution can state the qualification clearly while leaving verification procedures to ordinary law that can adapt over time.

7

If citizenship is already the intended rule, saying so directly makes the basic qualification easier for voters and officials to understand.

3
43% support · excluded by 12%
4
40% support · excluded by 10%
7

An eligibility rule is strongest when election officials affirmatively verify the qualification rather than relying primarily on declarations.

About the author