A review by Votebeat and Spotlight PA of the Republican Committee of Chester County’s effort to identify noncitizen voters by cross-referencing jury rejection lists with the state’s voter roll found no confirmed noncitizen voters among the 13 people who responded. The committee sent a letter to the county Board of Elections in August flagging more than 180 potential noncitizen voters, but a detailed review of a sample of those identified found that those who responded were either naturalized citizens who registered after gaining citizenship or, in one case, a U.S.-born citizen.
The non-juror lists are created when courts ask potential jurors to confirm citizenship; those who say they are not citizens are recorded. In Pennsylvania, these lists are public, and conservative activists have been using them to try to identify noncitizen voters.
In August, the Republican Committee of Chester County sent a letter to the county Board of Elections claiming that comparing the non-juror list to the voter roll had revealed more than 180 potential noncitizen voters. The committee provided a spreadsheet to the county commissioners.
Votebeat and Spotlight PA acquired the same non-juror list and recreated the committee’s process. In one instance, a data entry error by a county worker made a voter appear to have registered before naturalizing; the county said it is correcting the error.
Andrew Kreider, a Chester County spokesperson, said the county met with the Republican committee in August and explained the limitations of comparing the two lists. "We are committed to protecting the integrity of elections in Chester County, and will act quickly, in compliance with federal and state law, to address any specific and verifiable accusations of voter fraud," Kreider said in an email.
The comparison has limitations. The non-juror lists do not contain birthdates, addresses, or unique identifiers such as driver's license numbers, making it difficult to ensure that a person on one list is the same person on the other. The Pennsylvania Department of State warned that “nonjuror lists are not a useful tool to verify the accuracy of voter rolls” and said analyses relying on faulty methodologies such as comparisons to nonjuror lists can lead to inaccurate results and false claims about the citizenship status of eligible voters.
Wren Orey, managing director of the elections project at the Bipartisan Policy Center, said comparisons of voter lists with non-juror lists have been tried before, including in Texas. “Time and time again they find that the data is unreliable,” Orey said. Orey said a California county official’s pilot found that every person identified as a noncitizen on the juror list had naturalized after the list was created and before registering to vote, and the program was not continued.
Scott Presler, a conservative activist who began requesting non-juror lists in July, said in a September post on X: “I will not stop until we have acquired the non-juror records for every county in Pennsylvania.” He claimed his method has found more than 5,000 Pennsylvania voters “flagged as matches” and said it would enable his team to “identify how many people may have fraudulently voted.” However, he has not released his results for independent verification and has not acknowledged the flaws in the method. He did not return a request for comment.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- Efforts to purge voter rolls based on flawed data risk disenfranchising eligible voters, particularly naturalized citizens.
- The method is being promoted by activists across multiple states, undermining public confidence in election administration.
- The lack of verified results from such efforts highlights the need for accurate and transparent processes for maintaining voter rolls.
Background
Noncitizens are ineligible to vote in U.S. elections. Jury duty is restricted to U.S. citizens, so courts ask potential jurors to confirm their citizenship. Those who indicate they are not citizens are recorded on a "non-juror list," which is public in Pennsylvania. Conservative activists have begun comparing these lists to voter rolls to identify potential noncitizen voters. However, as the analysis shows, the lists often contain outdated information and lack sufficient identifiers to make accurate matches.
Key Perspectives
Scott Presler, conservative activist: He has been requesting non-juror lists across Pennsylvania and claims to have flagged more than 5,000 voters as matches. He has not publicly released his results for independent verification.
Republican Committee of Chester County: The committee sent a letter demanding the county act on the 180 potential noncitizen voters it identified through the comparison.
Jon Veurink, executive vice chair of the Chester County GOP: He acknowledged the investigation's findings and said he hopes no noncitizens are voting but wants a process to ensure that.
Andrew Kreider, Chester County spokesperson: He stated the county is committed to election integrity and will act on specific, verifiable fraud allegations, but noted the limitations of the list comparison.
Pennsylvania Department of State: It warned that nonjuror lists are not a useful tool for verifying voter rolls and can lead to false claims.
Wren Orey, managing director of the elections project at the Bipartisan Policy Center: Said this method has been tried before in other states and found to be unreliable, with a California pilot program finding every identified person had naturalized after the list was created.
What to Watch
- Whether other counties in Pennsylvania and elsewhere continue to adopt this method for voter roll reviews.
- The progress of the SAVE America Act in the U.S. Senate, which Presler has pushed for based on his findings.
- Any legal challenges or administrative actions resulting from the flawed identifications.
Checked
12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 11 supported.
Show each claim
- SupportedThe headline says the search found no confirmed noncitizen voters among 13 respondents.Spotlight PA: “Only 13 of the voters got back to us. But of them, not one noncitizen voter was confirmed.”
- SupportedState officials say non-juror lists are not a useful tool for verifying voter rolls.Spotlight PA: ““Nonjuror lists are not a useful tool to verify the accuracy of voter rolls,” Geoff Morrow, a spokesperson for the department, said in a statement.”
- Partly supportedThe story says respondents who were naturalized citizens registered after gaining citizenship.Spotlight PA: “Twelve of the respondents were naturalized citizens whose naturalization date was on or before their voter registration date.”
- SupportedIn August, the Republican Committee of Chester County said it had found more than 180 potential noncitizen voters by comparing the non-juror list with the voter roll.Spotlight PA: “In August, the Republican Committee of Chester County sent a letter to the Chester County Board of Elections saying that the committee had compared the county’s non-juror list to the county’s voter roll and discovered more than 180 potential noncitizen voters”
- SupportedAndrew Kreider said the county would act quickly on specific and verifiable accusations of voter fraud, in compliance with federal and state law.Spotlight PA: ““We are committed to protecting the integrity of elections in Chester County, and will act quickly, in compliance with federal and state law, to address any specific and verifiable accusations of voter fraud,” Kreider said in an email.”
- SupportedA county worker’s data entry error made one voter appear to have registered before naturalizing, and the county said it was correcting the error.Spotlight PA: “One respondent initially appeared to have registered before naturalizing, but when Votebeat and Spotlight PA reached out to the county to confirm, the county discovered that a county worker had made a data entry error on the voter’s registration date. [...] The county said the error is in the process of being corrected.”
- SupportedWren Orey said, “Time and time again they find that the data is unreliable.”Spotlight PA: ““Time and time again they find that the data is unreliable,” Orey said.”
- SupportedOrey said a California county official’s pilot found that every person identified as a noncitizen on the juror list had naturalized after the list was created and before registering to vote.Spotlight PA: “Orey said one county official in California did a pilot program using this method of comparison and found that every single person identified as a noncitizen on the juror list had naturalized after that list was created but before registering.”
- SupportedPresler said in a September post on X, “I will not stop until we have acquired the non-juror records for every county in Pennsylvania.”Spotlight PA: ““I will not stop until we have acquired the non-juror records for every county in Pennsylvania,” Scott Presler, one such activist, said in a September X post .”
- SupportedPresler said his method had found more than 5,000 Pennsylvania voters flagged as matches.Spotlight PA: “Presler has said the method has found more than 5,000 Pennsylvania voters “ flagged as matches ””
- SupportedPresler said the method would enable his team to “identify how many people may have fraudulently voted.”Spotlight PA: “and will enable his team to “ identify how many people may have fraudulently voted ,””
- SupportedPresler had not acknowledged the method’s flaws or released results for independent verification.Spotlight PA: “but he has not acknowledged the flaws in this type of match or released his results so that they can be independently verified.”