Chrissy Comfort is a foreign service officer for the U.S. State Department stationed in Juarez, Mexico, and a resident of South Dakota.
The daughter of two Navy veterans, Comfort jumped at an opportunity to work for the federal government. In November of 2023, Comfort and her husband moved from Washington D.C. to Juarez, just across the Texas border.
Comfort told South Dakota lawmakers her story during a House committee hearing in January.
“Living abroad full-time, however, comes with its fair share of logistical challenges as we don't physically reside in any U.S. state,” Comfort said. “And we only spend limited time in the U.S. due to the need to live at our designated post full-time.”
The legislative hearing was part of an attempt to revise a recent change in state voter registration laws. Just last year, state lawmakers passed a 30-day requirement which makes prospective voters prove they’ve lived in a fixed, permanent dwelling in South Dakota for at least 30 days.
Comfort said she and her husband detoured through South Dakota before their move to Mexico, to establish residency. The couple had lived in the state years ago when Comfort helped then Rapid City Regional Health transition its electronic health records system.
“So, you can imagine our excitement my husband and I upon learning that South Dakota, a state that we both hold dear, has a traveler residency program to accommodate less geographically conventional occupations such as mine,” Comfort said.
However, after working for a few weeks in Juarez, Comfort said she got a letter in the mail informing her their South Dakota voter registration requests were rejected.
“Because I had not provided proof of being in the state for 30 days,” Comfort said. “This was both surprising and confusing to me. How could we be allowed to become residents, but not allowed to vote? My new home was denying me this essential American right.”
Attempts to update the voter registration law during the 2024 South Dakota legislative session stalled.
South Dakota’s general residency laws are relaxed. Thousands, like Comfort, are registered residents through mail forwarding services in Sioux Falls and Rapid City. For a fee and following a one-night stay anywhere in the state, an individual can use the address to claim residency and obtain a driver’s license.
“The fact that senate Bill 139 remains in place from 2023, after this session, is a problem that leaves those customers in an uncertain position—at least in Minnehaha County," said Justin Smith, a lobbyist for the Association of South Dakota Mail Forwarders.
Smith said while customers of his clients are considered South Dakota residents, they are struggling to renew or get new voter registrations in Minnehaha County. Smith said the 30-day residency requirement for voter registration violates federal law.
“That concept, durational residency, to even be allowed to register under the Voting Rights Act in 1970, Congress said no state can do that for purposes of presidential elections, which creates a preemption problem here in South Dakota.”
Two bills sought to clarify the issue. One would have reverted back to state voter registration laws prior to last year’s session. House lawmakers sat on the change for weeks, before tabling the bill completely.
In an email, Minnehaha County auditor Leah Anderson said she is interpreting the law the way it’s written and intended. Anderson’s office is refusing to register voters like Chrissy Comfort who cannot satisfy the 30-day residency requirement.
“They're using a nonresidential address as a residential address on their registration form and then they are not providing an explanation in box 4A as to where they maintain their residency,” Anderson said during a legislative hearing. “So, they’re using a mailing address for their residence and their mailing. That is not right.”
Anderson told lawmakers Comfort never responded to registration notices from the county and failed to identify herself as an overseas voter.
Samantha Chapman, advocacy manager for the ACLU South Dakota, said voting is a constitutional right and said South Dakota lawmakers should work to fix flaws in the current law.
“It’s really important that everybody who is eligible to vote can be register and be participating in these elections," Chapman said.
Chapman said there’s no shortage of potential plaintiffs for a lawsuit. She points to cases like that of U.S. State Department employee Chrissy Comfort, as an example of someone who is disenfranchised by the state’s current law.
“Given the importance in allowing as many people to vote as possible, I think litigation is very likely," Chapman added.
As residents of South Dakota, Comfort said she and her husband contribute to South Dakota government through various fees and taxes.
“In return, we only ask that South Dakota honor and provide that key pillar of democracy: the right to vote," Comfort said.
But any voter rights restoration for Comfort won’t come from the legislature in time to allow her to legally vote until after the 2024 election.
