California Protects Polling Sites from Immigration Enforcement

This event scores low on constitutional damage (2.35) but very high on distraction/hype (33.16), yielding D=-30.81. The core issue contains a fundamental factual error: non-citizens cannot legally vote in federal elections, making the premise misleading. A-score is minimal because protecting polling sites from enforcement is within state police powers and doesn't fundamentally damage constitutional structures. Election driver scores 4 due to potential voter intimidation concerns, but the framing conflates immigrant (legal residents/citizens) with illegal immigration. B-score is elevated by: (1) Layer 1 hype with high outrage potential around immigration/voting intersection (26/40=65%), (2) Layer 2 strategic timing perfectly aligned with midterms (34/40=85%), and (3) high intentionality (12/15) indicating deliberate wedge issue deployment. The mismatch between stated concern (protecting voters) and reality (non-citizens can't vote) suggests narrative construction rather than substantive policy. Single-state scope limits constitutional impact but amplifies political theater value.