The civic record
Read. Follow. Verify.Wisconsin SB 1071 Prohibits Ballot Placement and Electoral Votes for Ineligible Federal Candidates
Last action · March 23, 2026: Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1Sponsors: Kelda Roys and 18 others
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
What This Bill Proposed
Wisconsin Senate Bill 1071 prohibits election officials from placing the name of any candidate for U.S. President, Vice President, U.S. Senator, or Representative on the ballot if the candidate is conclusively ineligible under the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, the measure prohibits s from voting for any presidential or vice-presidential candidate who is constitutionally ineligible for office.
The measure establishes statutory restrictions preventing constitutionally ineligible candidates from appearing on federal election ballots or receiving electoral votes in Wisconsin.
- State legislatures and election boards hold administrative responsibilities regarding ballot access and the certification of candidates for federal and state offices. context
Who It Would Have Affected
Groups the bill's text would have affected, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.
candidates for federal office
Candidates found to be constitutionally ineligible are barred from appearing on the ballot for national office in Wisconsin.
presidential electors
Electors are prohibited from casting electoral votes for presidential or vice-presidential candidates who are determined to be constitutionally ineligible.
election officials
Officials responsible for receiving declarations of candidacy are required to withhold ineligible candidates from the ballot.
Key Facts
- Election officials are prohibited from placing the name of a candidate for U.S. President, Vice President, U.S. Senator, or U.S. Representative on the ballot if it conclusively appears the candidate is ineligible under the U.S. Constitution.
- Presidential electors are prohibited from voting for a presidential or vice-presidential candidate if it conclusively appears the candidate is ineligible under the U.S. Constitution.
- Ineligibility may be established by the face of nomination papers, by admission of the candidate, or otherwise.
Frequently Asked Questions
What federal offices are covered under the ballot placement prohibition?
How is a candidate's constitutional ineligibility determined under the bill?
What else do you want to know?
News Coverage
Follow the record
Votes, people, money & the original sourceWhere This Stands
This bill did not become law - Failed in the Senate.
Procedural history
7 actions- Mar 23, 2026SenateFailed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1
- Mar 19, 2026SenateRepresentative Palmeri added as a cosponsor
- Mar 19, 2026SenateRepresentative Subeck added as a cosponsor
- Mar 18, 2026SenateRepresentative Anderson added as a cosponsor
- Mar 2, 2026SenateRepresentative Clancy added as a cosponsor
- Feb 26, 2026SenateIntroducedRead first time and referred to Committee on Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs
Show 1 earlier action
- Feb 26, 2026SenateIntroducedIntroduced by Senators Roys, Dassler-Alfheim, Larson, Ratcliff and Spreitzer; cosponsored by Representatives Bare, Snodgrass, Kirsch, Arney, Emerson, Fitzgerald, Hong, J. Jacobson, Joers, Miresse, Roe, Sinicki, Tenorio and Udell
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →Lobbying Activity
No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.
Full breakdown
Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.
Sponsors
Show 14 more sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Connected Entities
Sources
docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance20Lowered because this bill did not pass (its text scored 65)
- Controversy80Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment10Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz40Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools