Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson admits noncitizens are voting in Michigan elections, but she refuses to reveal any details about where the illegal ballots were cast in 2024.

“I can share that these appear to be scattered, isolated events across the state, not largely concentrated in specific counties or jurisdictions,” Benson spokeswoman Angela Benander told The Federalist.

That’s about all of the information Benson’s office is willing to provide in response to the news site’s public information request for “the cities, and university campuses where applicable, where the 15 possible noncitizens allegedly voted.”

The request was triggered by a recent Department of State review of motor vehicle records and the state’s Qualified Voter File that confirmed at least 15 instances of illegal voting in 2024, findings that contradict Benson’s testimony before Congress in September that “there is no evidence that noncitizens are voting.”

Those illegal votes are in addition to an illegal ballot cast by Haoxiang Gao, a University of Michigan student from China, using his student ID in Washtenaw County in October.

Gao’s vote was counted in the 2024 election, along with 15 others identified by Benson in early April, though the limited scope of the Secretary of State’s review suggests others are likely, as it did not cover folks who voted with alternative IDs and many noncitizens do not have driver’s licenses or state issued identification.

Benson referred 13 of the illegal voters to Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel for prosecution, but neither Benson nor Nessel will share any details on the alleged crimes.

Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial

Benson’s office denied The Federalist’s public records request based on allegations it would “interfere with law enforcement proceedings” and cause problems for “candid policy making communications.”

“The Department of State has an ongoing investigation, release of the information would jeopardize this investigation,” the response read.

Nessel spokeswoman Kimberly Bush offered a similar excuse, noting “review of these cases remains ongoing,” and she “cannot provide further information or comment.”

“Attorney General Dana Nessel has been committed to pursuing, investigating, and charging, cases of election fraud, and has done so on numerous cases when the evidence provides for criminal charges,” Bush told The Federalist. “At the conclusion of this review, our office will make an appropriate public announcement regarding our findings.”

Go Ad-Free, Get Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial

In addition to the locations of the illegal votes, Benson’s office refused to share “any and all emails or case files” related to the investigation that reference the University of Michigan or Ann Arbor.

Benson argued “communications and notes … of an advisory nature” are exempt from records requests because “staff would be hesitant to speak frankly and express their views if such views were subject to unrestricted public disclosure under the (Freedom of Information Act).”

“Disclosure of the contents of these records containing opinions, comments, evaluations and observations would have an adverse effect on Department staff’s willingness to make candid assessments and offer advice on a course of action,” officials wrote. “The Department has a strong interest in preserving candid policy making communications which clearly outweigh the public interest in disclosure.”

Benson’s refusal to discuss the illegal votes isn’t the first time she’s worked to shield public information from the public while simultaneously contradicting her repeated promises to increase government transparency.

This week, the Michigan House Oversight Committee voted to subpoena Benson and the Michigan Department of State for election training materials after she repeatedly refused to provide the documents voluntarily.

“We’re not talking about state secrets here; these are just basic election training materials regularly provided to Michigan clerks,” said Rep. Rachelle Smit, R-Martin, who initially requested the materials in early November. “Secretary Benson had five months and ample opportunities to be transparent and work with us. She refused, leaving us with no choice but to issue a subpoena.”

Benson, who is running her own election to replace Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in 2026, initially told Smit the information she wanted would cost $9,000 and require 140 man-hours to produce after forcing the House Speaker Pro Tem to submit a public records request.

“Our request was unmistakably clear: simply to be given login credentials to the e-learning portal so we could review the training and instructions provided to Michigan clerks,” Smit said. “All of these documents should be public and should not be hidden behind false privileges.”

It’s a similar situation with Benson’s botched $9 million “Michigan Transparency Network,” which she said would “make personal financial disclosure, campaign finance, lobbying and legal defense fund information publicly available in one convenient, easy-to-use web portal.”

When journalists recently attempted to use the new portal, they realized it now provides less information than before, omitting lobbyist client lists and expenses, as well as mass downloads of public information used by watchdogs to hold public officials accountable.

It’s the kind of public information used last year to reveal Benson’s Michigan Legacy PAC gave at least $82,500 to Supreme Court Justice Kyra Harris Bolden at a time when Bolden was overseeing cases involving the Secretary of State. Unsurprisingly, Bolden ruled in Benson’s favor. Benson’s PAC donations were part of a broader effort to expand the high court’s liberal majority that the now obscured records show was also financed by massive donations from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the George Soros funded super PAC State Victory Action, and trial lawyers.

Benson’s new transparency roadblocks are essentially “taking away your opportunity for people to see the whole picture,” Brendan Glavin, research director at OpenSecrets, told Bridge Michigan.

“Ending open campaign finance and lobbying data access will force the public to use difficult and costly FOIA requests, which have their own limitations in Michigan,” said Michigan Campaign Finance Network Executive Director Neil Thanedar. “MDOS should reverse these changes and make it as easy as possible to download and analyze government transparency data.”