State Implementation Guides¶
50 States — All Guides
16Tier 1 States
11Tier 2 States
23Tier 3 States
194City Flyers
All 50 states now have individual guide pages covering legal analysis, election security infrastructure, and strategic assessments for the Municipal Election Integrity Ordinance. Use the tier tables below to find your state, or use the interactive 50-State Analysis for the full comparative view.
Each state guide follows a consistent five-section structure:
- Legal Battlefield — home rule framework, preemption risks, key cases
- Statute Localization Kit — state-specific statutes that support or constrain the ordinance
- Target City Analysis — ranked cities with council composition and political dynamics
- Coalition Directory — advocacy organizations with contact information
- Election Security Infrastructure — cybersecurity capabilities, physical security, polling place protections, and key contacts
Tier 1 — GREEN States (Strong Viability)¶
Tier 1: 16 States
Strong home rule authority, no anti-sanctuary preemption, and favorable political environments. These states have the clearest legal pathways for ordinance adoption.
| State | Key Legal Authority | Primary Target Cities | Guide | Flyer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | Art. X §11 (explicit home rule); AS 15.56.030 | Anchorage, Juneau, Fairbanks | Guide | Flyer |
| California | Art. XI §§5,7; SB 54 (sanctuary state) | Berkeley, San Francisco, West Hollywood | Guide | Flyer |
| Colorado | Art. XX §6; Vote Without Fear Act (HB22-1086) | Boulder, Denver, Aurora | Guide | Flyer |
| Illinois | Art. VII §6 home rule; TRUST Act (5 ILCS 805/) | Chicago, Evanston, Oak Park | Guide | Flyer |
| Maine | 30-A M.R.S. § 3001; § 2671(2); LD 1971 (Dec. 2025) | Portland, Bangor, Lewiston | Guide | Flyer |
| Maryland | Art. XI-A,E,F; Election Law § 16-903 | Baltimore City, Montgomery County, Howard County | Guide | Flyer |
| Massachusetts | Amend. Art. 89; Lunn v. Commonwealth (2017) | Cambridge, Somerville, Northampton | Guide | Flyer |
| Michigan | Art. VII §§22,34; Proposal 2 (2022) | East Lansing, Ann Arbor, Ferndale | Guide | Flyer |
| Minnesota | Minn. Stat. § 204C.06; Art. XII §4 charter cities | Minneapolis, St. Paul, Duluth | Guide | Flyer |
| New Jersey | Faulkner Act; N.J.S.A. 40A:14-118 | Hoboken, Newark, Jersey City | Guide | Flyer |
| New Mexico | NMSA § 1-20-24 (2024 firearms at polls) | Santa Fe, Las Cruces, Albuquerque | Guide | Flyer |
| New York | Art. IX; Municipal Home Rule Law § 10 | New York City, Ithaca, Rochester | Guide | Flyer |
| Ohio | Art. XVIII (1912); ORC § 737.05 | Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati | Guide | Flyer |
| Oregon | Art. XI §2; ORS 181A.820 (sanctuary since 1987) | Portland, Bend, Corvallis | Guide | Flyer |
| Rhode Island | Art. XIII; N. Providence v. FOP (2022) | Providence, Central Falls | Guide | Flyer |
| Washington | Art. XI §§10–11; Keep Washington Working Act | Seattle, Olympia, Spokane | Guide | Flyer |
Tier 2 — Proceed with Caution¶
Tier 2: 11 States — Viable but Requires Careful Navigation
These states have viable legal pathways but face moderate preemption risk, Dillon's Rule constraints, or complex political environments. Each state guide includes tailored legal analysis and strategic recommendations.
| State | Key Challenge | Strategic Notes | Guide | Flyer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Connecticut | CGS § 7-192a explicit election preemption | "Federal law implementation" framing viable; TRUST Act 2025 provides additional support | Guide | Flyer |
| Delaware | Statutory home rule (municipalities only); Dillon's Rule for counties | Feasible for Wilmington; statutory home rule under 22 Del. C. Ch. 8 | Guide | Flyer |
| Hawaii | Dillon's Rule county system; four-county structure | County-level action only; unique four-county structure provides extraordinary efficiency | Guide | Flyer |
| Kansas | Conservative governance despite strong constitutional home rule (since 1961) | Political rather than legal barrier; Kansas City and Lawrence are viable targets | Guide | Flyer |
| Kentucky | Dillon's Rule; KY Const. §§156-160 | Louisville and Lexington offer strongest pathways | Guide | Flyer |
| Nebraska | Dillon's Rule + limited home rule for cities over 5,000 | Omaha-specific pathway under NE Const. Art. XI, §2 | Guide | Flyer |
| Nevada | 2025 DOJ agreement complicates landscape; modified Dillon's Rule | Clark County specific opportunities; dependent on political developments | Guide | Flyer |
| New Hampshire | Strict Dillon's Rule; RSA 47:17 limits municipal authority | Very limited pathway; Manchester and Nashua are potential targets | Guide | Flyer |
| Pennsylvania | Crawford v. Philadelphia (2024) firearms preemption; PA Const. Art. I §5 | Philadelphia and Pittsburgh specific analysis; strong "free and equal elections" clause | Guide | Flyer |
| Vermont | Strict Dillon's Rule; 24 V.S.A. limitations | Burlington exception; Democratic trifecta provides legislative pathway | Guide | Flyer |
| Wisconsin | Wis. Stat. § 66.0409 firearms preemption; 2017 sanctuary ban | "Police operational directives" framing avoids both traps; Voces de la Frontera partnership model | Guide | Flyer |
Tier 3 — Significant Barriers¶
Tier 3: 23 States with Anti-Sanctuary Laws or Severe Structural Barriers
These states have enacted anti-sanctuary laws with penalties ranging from mandatory funding cuts to felony charges for local officials (Tennessee SB 6002, enacted 2025). Passing an election integrity ordinance in these states without careful legal architecture exposes officials to serious personal legal risk. Each state guide includes election security analysis and identifies any available strategic windows.
| State | Key Barrier | Strategic Notes | Guide | Flyer |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | Dillon's Rule (strict); proposed anti-sanctuary legislation | No statutory prohibition on firearms at polling places; most critical gap | Guide | Flyer |
| Arizona | SB 1070 (2010); SB 1487 (2016) preemption nuclear option | Limited municipal authority under City of Tucson v. State framework; swing state window | Guide | Flyer |
| Arkansas | Dillon's Rule + limited home rule; 2019 anti-sanctuary ban | Little Rock and Fayetteville offer limited home rule pathways | Guide | Flyer |
| Florida | SB 168 (2019) anti-sanctuary; F.S. § 790.33 firearms preemption | Strong election infrastructure but impenetrable preemption wall | Guide | Flyer |
| Georgia | HB 87 (2011); HB 301 (2024) — any resident can sue, sovereign immunity rescinded | DeKalb and Fulton County specific opportunities; swing state window | Guide | Flyer |
| Idaho | HB 465 (2012) anti-sanctuary; constitutional carry | Boise offers limited home rule pathway; conservative trifecta | Guide | Flyer |
| Indiana | SB 590 (2011); SB 181 (2024); AG active enforcement | Indianapolis and Bloomington Democratic supermajorities offer strategic windows | Guide | Flyer |
| Iowa | SF 481 (2018) statewide anti-sanctuary ban | Constitutional home rule since 1968 but severe preemption environment | Guide | Flyer |
| Louisiana | Hybrid governance; conservative political environment | New Orleans existing sanctuary provides limited pathway | Guide | Flyer |
| Mississippi | SB 2988 (2008) anti-sanctuary; Dillon's Rule | Jackson offers limited municipal pathway | Guide | Flyer |
| Missouri | Constitutional home rule (charter cities) but statewide ban | Kansas City and St. Louis charter city authority may provide pathway | Guide | Flyer |
| Montana | HB 200 (2017) anti-sanctuary; strong home rule undermined by preemption | Missoula offers best municipal pathway despite barriers | Guide | Flyer |
| North Carolina | State ban; HB 10 (2024); modified Dillon's Rule | Guilford County precedents on police operational discretion; swing state window | Guide | Flyer |
| North Dakota | 2011 anti-sanctuary legislation; constitutional home rule | Fargo and Grand Forks offer limited pathways | Guide | Flyer |
| Oklahoma | HB 1804 (2007) anti-sanctuary; Dillon's Rule + home rule provisions | Oklahoma City and Tulsa face severe preemption barriers | Guide | Flyer |
| South Carolina | SB 20 (2011) E-Verify requirements; home rule since 1993 | Charleston and Columbia offer home rule pathways despite barriers | Guide | Flyer |
| South Dakota | 2011 anti-sanctuary legislation; Dillon's Rule | Most restrictive governance framework in the batch | Guide | Flyer |
| Tennessee | SB 6002 (2025) — felony charges (1-6 years) for officials | Most severe penalties in the nation; Nashville and Memphis face extreme risk | Guide | Flyer |
| Texas | SB 4 (2017) — daily fines up to $25,500, misdemeanor, removal | "Mirror argument" (anti-commandeering doctrine) provides strongest legal foundation | Guide | Flyer |
| Utah | Strong home rule but conservative political environment | Salt Lake City offers strongest municipal pathway | Guide | Flyer |
| Virginia | Dillon's Rule (strictest in nation); effective anti-sanctuary via Dillon's Rule | Democratic trifecta provides state legislative pathway | Guide | Flyer |
| West Virginia | Comprehensive anti-sanctuary ban; hybrid governance | Highest-priority target in Eastern batch despite barriers | Guide | Flyer |
| Wyoming | Dillon's Rule; state anti-sanctuary policy | Constitutional carry with comprehensive firearms preemption | Guide | Flyer |
Exception — Swing State Strategic Windows: Several Tier 3 swing states have specific legal theories that may survive preemption challenges. The 50-State Analysis details state-specific windows for:
- Arizona — limited municipal authority under City of Tucson v. State framework
- Georgia — DeKalb and Fulton County specific opportunities
- North Carolina — Guilford County precedents on police operational discretion
- Pennsylvania — Philadelphia Home Rule Charter exceptions (see Pennsylvania Guide)
Always consult independent legal counsel in these states before any public advocacy.