Wyoming’s new voter registration law spurs legal fight

A Wyoming voting rights group filed a federal lawsuit recently challenging the constitutionality of the state’s new voter registration requirements.

Set to go into effect in July, the law requires a person to provide proof of state residency and U.S. citizenship when registering to vote. It represented a key priority of the further-right wing of the Wyoming Legislature and Secretary of State Chuck Gray.

The law, however, will impose an undue burden on the right to vote — particularly for women as well as Hispanic, young and low-income voters — and is unconstitutionally vague as written, according to the complaint filed by Equality State Policy Center in the U.S. District Court for Wyoming. 

“Wyoming has a proud tradition of fair and secure elections, and there is no evidence of non-citizen voting or widespread fraud to justify the harsh new restrictions,” policy center Executive Director Jenny DeSarro said in a statement. 

There have been four convictions of voter fraud in Wyoming since 2000, according to a database created by The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. All four cases involved U.S. citizens. 

Supporters of the new law, including Gray, maintain it is needed to ensure that only Wyoming residents vote in Wyoming elections. In February, the Wyoming Legislature passed House Bill 156, “Proof of voter residency-registration qualifications,” before Gov. Mark Gordon let it become law without his signature.

Gillette Republican and former Wyoming Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. John Bear was the lead sponsor of the bill. 

“The people of Wyoming overwhelmingly support this no-brainer law and rightfully expect the attorney general to vigorously defend it in court,” the Freedom Caucus posted Monday on Facebook.  

The suit names Gray and each of the state’s 23 county clerks in their official capacities as defendants. 

“Proof of citizenship and proof of residency are common sense, conservative measures pivotal to election integrity, which is why house Bill 156 was the number one priority of our conservative election integrity agenda during the 2025 Legislative Session,” Gray said in a press release.

“I will be vigorously defending Wyoming’s proof of citizenship and residency requirements. We will fight this lawsuit and the false claims in it. And we will win.”

The law specifies what documents provide proof of residency and citizenship but leaves the secretary of state’s office to iron out the technicalities through the rulemaking process. That requires a public comment period, which is currently open. 

Undue burden

In many instances, a valid Wyoming driver’s license will suffice for proof of identity, residency and U.S. citizenship under the new law. Under the rules now being proposed by Gray, those documents will work so long as they list a Wyoming address. 

But the process won’t be so simple for other voters, the complaint argues.

“This is particularly true for young, low-income, and already underrepresented voters,” the suit states. “Many more do not have documents that match their current name—including women who changed their names after marriage.” 

And obtaining such documentation will “require navigating a labyrinth of bureaucracy, all with attendant costs and delays, while election day draws nearer.”

Others still, the complaint argues, won’t realize they need such documentation “until it is too late and will be disenfranchised altogether.”

The suit points to voters who may think they are still registered despite “Wyoming’s uniquely aggressive voter list maintenance.” 

Around this time last year, for example, more than 83,000 Wyoming registered voters were purged for not having voted in the most recent election — accounting for a roughly 28% drop in the state’s registered voters. 

Plus, there may be added confusion since the state “allows a much wider range of documents to prove identity to satisfy its voter ID law” as compared to its new proof of residency and citizenship laws, “including student IDs, Medicaid insurance card, even Wyoming concealed firearm permits,” according to the complaint.

Altogether, the new law “favors people who have lived in the same place, with the name they were given at birth, and have a safe and stable place to store their sensitive documents,” the plaintiffs argue. 

“But many citizens, who are no less entitled to vote, do not enjoy these conditions.” 

Constitutional vagueness

The plaintiffs also argue the new law is unconstitutionally vague as written, which was a concern shared by Gordon when he allowed the bill to become law without his signature. 

In particular, Gordon pointed to a section of the new law that instructs county clerks to accept a prospective voter’s proof of citizenship so long as it does not contain “any indication” that the person is not a U.S. citizen. 

“This standard may be difficult for clerks to administer, as it is unclear and perhaps awkward for our county clerks to consistently apply with any degree of certainty,” Gordon wrote in a letter explaining his decision not to sign the bill. 

The lawsuit makes a similar point. 

Such a standard “both fails to allow persons of ordinary intelligence to anticipate how the law will be enforced and invites arbitrary enforcement, it is void for vagueness,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit also points to other states that have attempted to add proof of residency and citizenship requirements to the voter registration process, including Arizona, Kansas and New Hampshire. 

“Other states have tried to impose similar restrictions, and their experience proves that the real effect of the (new law’s)requirements will not be to safeguard Wyoming’s elections from noncitizen voting — a problem that does not exist,” the complaint states. “Instead, the new restrictions will exclude citizens from the electoral process.”

The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl, according to the case docket.