Vermont Supreme Court rulings on noncitizen voting
Social posts indicate the Vermont Supreme Court has approved noncitizen voting in cities like Montpelier and Burlington, a change that could expand civic engagement among immigrant residents in those municipalities. The decisions were discussed publicly on social channels this week, signaling a potential shift in local voting rules. ( )
In Ferry v. City of Montpelier, the Vermont Supreme Court issued an opinion on Jan. 20, 2023 affirming the trial court and holding that Montpelier’s statute allowing legal noncitizen residents to vote in municipal elections does not violate Chapter II, §42 of the Vermont Constitution. (law.justia.com) Winooski voters approved an all‑resident charter amendment at the ballot, and the Legislature enacted H.227 to authorize Winooski’s noncitizen voting when it overrode Gov. Phil Scott’s veto on June 23, 2021. (winooskivt.gov) Burlington voters approved a charter amendment in March 2023 to allow legal noncitizen residents to vote in municipal and school board elections, and the state Legislature overrode the governor’s veto to enact that change in June 2023. (ballotpedia.org) A Chittenden County Superior Court judge dismissed the challenge to Burlington’s school‑election provisions on Feb. 7, 2025, the plaintiffs Michele Morin and Karen Rowell (backed by Restoring Integrity and Trust in Elections) appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court, and oral argument in the appeal was scheduled and heard in October 2025. (democracydocket.com) The appellants contend Section 42 of the Vermont Constitution bars noncitizens from voting on matters that “concern the State of Vermont,” arguing school budget votes implicate statewide funding, while the city and intervenors point to Ferry and related rulings that §42 does not reach purely local municipal elections and emphasize legislative authorization. (riteusa.org) As of March 31, 2026, the Vermont Supreme Court had not published an opinion resolving Docket No. 25‑AP‑072 (Morin v. City of Burlington) and the matter remains listed as pending in case trackers and the court’s opinions library. (democracydocket.com)
