6,600 Noncitizens Found On New Jersey Voter Rolls As Democrats Fight Against Voter ID 77%

By Brianna Lyman86%

7/21/2026, 8:06:45 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 33 faulty reasoning types, including Confirmation Bias, Biased Writer Voice, and Negativity Bias, with Politically Right Leaning Bias as the most egregious example at 40% saturation with 275 hits. Analysis detected 2,128 faulty-reasoning hits from 687 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 68.1% and a BS Rank of 77% (5,223 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 76.10% of the article peer group.

The things Democrats insist never happen are happening again: Noncitizens are getting onto the voter rolls and voting  and President Donald Trump is being proven right again about insecure elections and the urgent need to pass the SAVE America Act. 
New Jersey Democrat Gov. 
Mikie Sherrill announced Tuesday that her administration learned about a “software error” in the state's motor vehicle system that “led to the registration of roughly 6,600 people who indicated they were not U.S. citizens between June 2023 and June 2024. 
 These individuals answered ‘no’ when asked on a keypad whether they were a U.S. citizen when applying for drivers' licenses and identification cards, but through no fault of their own, the system registered them anyway.” 
Sherrill was not in office at the time of the security failure. 
A “preliminary analysis shows fewer than 400 individuals who were newly registered for the first time because of the error voted,” the governor continued. 
Sherrill said she has ordered her administration to remove any residents from voter rolls who were “erroneously added” and indicated that the state is in the “process of replacing the vendor responsible for administering the system.” 
New Jersey is one of more than 20 states the Department of Justice has sued for refusing to turn over voter rolls to be “cross-checked effectively for improper registrations.” 
In other words, our elections are insecure and vulnerable to foreign election interference. 
Noncitizens can (and do) register to vote, and they also can (and do) illegally vote in our elections. 
In fact, The Federalist previously reported that voter rolls from at least eight of the state's 21 counties show several instances in which noncitizens were registered to vote, with several stating they did “not understand” how they became “registered through the Department of Motor Vehicles, allegedly.” 
Republicans, including Trump, have warned about this vulnerability for years. 
But even as Sherrill acknowledged that thousands of noncitizens were improperly registered and hundreds apparently voted, she still felt compelled to reassure leftists that her newfound concern for election integrity should not be confused with Trump's longstanding warnings about the very problem she just confirmed. 
“As the Trump Administration tries to weaponize elections for political gain, I am ensuring we protect our elections. 
Let me be clear: Donald Trump has zero credibility on the issue of election integrity. 
For more than ten years, he has worked to undermine Americans' faith in our elections by spreading lies about legitimate election results, attempting to overturn a free and fair election, encouraging an attack on our Capitol when he couldn't accept the will of the voters, and defunding election security at the federal level,” she said. 
But the evidence that Trump has far more credibility on the issue of election integrity than most Democrats simply continues to mount. 
Because it is Democrats who insist this recurring problem isn't actually happening and that we don't need the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act despite yet another instance of noncitizens making it onto the voter rolls and even voting. 
The SAVE America Act would amend the 1993 National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) to require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote as well as voter ID to cast a ballot. 
The NVRA requires automatic voter registration at DMVs and  due to a bad Supreme Court ruling in *Arizona v. 
Inter Tribal Council of Arizona*  prohibits states from adding documentary proof of citizenship requirements for federal voter registration forms. 
By amending the NVRA with the SAVE America Act, states like New Jersey would not need to worry about noncitizens erroneously ending up on voter rolls  and even voting  because they would not be able to register to vote unless they provide actual proof of citizenship rather than merely checking a box “yes” or “no” under penalty of perjury. 
Yet Democrats (and a handful of RINOs) are still holding up this election-integrity legislation that would solve the very problem that even Democrats are now forced to confront. 
*This article has been updated since publication. 
* 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 32.3%Brianna Lyman: 12.1%The Federalist: 8.5%Confirmation Bias32.3%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.6%The Federalist: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 2.6%Brianna Lyman: 5.8%The Federalist: 3.5%Availability Heuristic2.6%This article: 6.7%Brianna Lyman: 0.7%The Federalist: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic6.7%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 1.0%The Federalist: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.2%Brianna Lyman: 0.5%The Federalist: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias3.2%This article: 4.7%Brianna Lyman: 16.9%The Federalist: 10.1%Framing Effect4.7%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 8.9%Brianna Lyman: 0.8%The Federalist: 1.0%Optimism Bias8.9%This article: 5.1%Brianna Lyman: 1.8%The Federalist: 1.7%Pessimism Bias5.1%This article: 24.7%Brianna Lyman: 13.5%The Federalist: 12.4%Negativity Bias24.7%This article: 11.8%Brianna Lyman: 0.7%The Federalist: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias11.8%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 1.7%The Federalist: 1.7%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 1.7%Brianna Lyman: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias1.7%This article: 12.1%Brianna Lyman: 3.2%The Federalist: 3.9%In-Group Bias12.1%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 2.8%The Federalist: 2.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.6%The Federalist: 2.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.7%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 7.4%Brianna Lyman: 2.6%The Federalist: 1.3%Recency Bias7.4%This article: 1.5%Brianna Lyman: 1.2%The Federalist: 0.6%Primacy Effect1.5%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.2%The Federalist: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 10.2%Brianna Lyman: 4.0%The Federalist: 5.3%Ad Hominem10.2%This article: 4.1%Brianna Lyman: 2.8%The Federalist: 2.7%Straw Man4.1%This article: 13.8%Brianna Lyman: 6.2%The Federalist: 5.0%Appeal to Authority13.8%This article: 5.8%Brianna Lyman: 2.8%The Federalist: 2.8%False Dilemma5.8%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 2.9%The Federalist: 2.3%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.7%The Federalist: 0.4%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.6%Brianna Lyman: 13.5%The Federalist: 11.4%Hasty Generalization8.6%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 5.5%Brianna Lyman: 0.8%The Federalist: 0.5%Bandwagon5.5%This article: 10.6%Brianna Lyman: 8.0%The Federalist: 8.2%Appeal to Emotion10.6%This article: 1.9%Brianna Lyman: 4.1%The Federalist: 3.1%Begging the Question1.9%This article: 6.0%Brianna Lyman: 3.1%The Federalist: 2.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)6.0%This article: 6.6%Brianna Lyman: 0.7%The Federalist: 0.5%Tu Quoque6.6%This article: 5.8%Brianna Lyman: 3.2%The Federalist: 1.1%Burden of Proof5.8%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 8.7%Brianna Lyman: 5.8%The Federalist: 2.8%Anecdotal8.7%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.3%The Federalist: 0.3%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 2.2%Brianna Lyman: 3.6%The Federalist: 1.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)2.2%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.0%The Federalist: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.1%The Federalist: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.6%The Federalist: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 8.9%Brianna Lyman: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.2%Special Pleading8.9%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.4%The Federalist: 0.8%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.8%Brianna Lyman: 5.2%The Federalist: 3.1%Unattributed Quote5.8%This article: 2.6%Brianna Lyman: 3.9%The Federalist: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection2.6%This article: 25.2%Brianna Lyman: 21.9%The Federalist: 19.7%Biased Writer Voice25.2%This article: 10.0%Brianna Lyman: 3.5%The Federalist: 5.2%Indoctrination10.0%This article: 0.0%Brianna Lyman: 0.5%The Federalist: 0.3%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 40.0%Brianna Lyman: 17.8%The Federalist: 15.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias40.0%This article: 4.7%Brianna Lyman: 0.4%The Federalist: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.7%

687 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers37%attributed speech434writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 40 words • 100.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 36 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 24 words • 0.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 36 words • 0.0% coverageDepartment of Justice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 45 words • 100.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 18 words • 100.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 15 words • 0.0% coverageMikie Sherrill • 55 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 40 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 61 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Mikie Sherrill

73%flagged-word coverage
224 attributed words89% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%32.5%65.0%Politically Right Leaning -63.4 ptsWriter: 63.4%Mikie Sherrill: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-39.9 ptsWriter: 39.9%Mikie Sherrill: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote+17.9 ptsWriter: 0.0%Mikie Sherrill: 17.9%17.9%Indoctrination-15.9 ptsWriter: 15.9%Mikie Sherrill: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection+8.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Mikie Sherrill: 8.0%8.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -7.4 ptsWriter: 7.4%Mikie Sherrill: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.