New York Judge Strikes Down Law Allowing Democrats To Force Towns Into Accepting Illegal Migrants

A New York State Supreme Court judge has overturned the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act (NYVRA), a controversial law Democrats were using to sue towns and push policies favoring illegal immigration. The court ruled that the law, which classified people by race and national origin, violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

The NYVRA was designed to prevent alleged discrimination by requiring towns with at-large voting systems to seek state approval before altering election methods. Critics say the law allowed Democrats to target local governments resisting progressive agendas, including the acceptance of illegal immigrants.

In Newburgh, a group of Black and Hispanic residents sued the town, claiming its at-large system prevented them from electing candidates of their choice. They demanded single-member districts to increase minority representation. The court, however, struck down the law, stating, “For Plaintiffs to suggest that the NYVRA is not a race-based statute is simply to deny the obvious.”

Mount Pleasant faced a similar lawsuit, with Hispanic plaintiffs claiming the at-large system diluted their voting power. The town had previously issued an emergency order refusing to accept illegal immigrants, sparking speculation that the lawsuit was part of a broader effort to force compliance with pro-immigration policies. The court’s decision prevents such lawsuits from moving forward.

This ruling protects towns like Newburgh and Mount Pleasant from being coerced into abandoning their election systems or accepting policies that strain local resources. By declaring the NYVRA unconstitutional, the court has ensured that federal equal protection principles prevail over state-level political maneuvers.

Supporters of the decision argue that it restores fairness to local governance, preventing Democrats from leveraging race-based classifications to override the democratic process. The court’s ruling is seen as a victory for towns defending their autonomy against state overreach.