U.S. Judge Blocks Trump Order Mandating Proof of Citizenship for Voting | Trump Administration
Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Proof of Citizenship Requirement for Voter Registration
In a significant ruling, a federal judge has determined that former President Donald Trump’s proposal to mandate documentary proof of citizenship for federal voter registration cannot be enforced. This decision may have far-reaching implications for election reform and public opinion regarding electoral processes in the United States.
Ruling Upholds Constitutional Norms
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, sitting in Washington, D.C., sided with Democratic and civil rights groups that challenged the Trump administration’s executive order aimed at overhauling U.S. elections. In her ruling, Kollar-Kotelly stated that the citizenship proof requirement violated the separation of powers, thus undermining the administration’s argument that such a mandate was essential to restoring trust in electoral integrity.
“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the States and to Congress, this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote. She emphasized that setting qualifications for voting and regulating federal election procedures does not fall within the President’s direct responsibilities.
Legal Implications and Future Challenges
The ruling grants the plaintiffs a partial summary judgment, preventing the proof-of-citizenship requirement from being implemented. The U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which had been contemplating changes to the federal voter registration form, is now permanently barred from taking any action related to this requirement.
The lawsuit, initiated by the Democratic National Committee and various civil rights organizations, remains active. The judge will evaluate additional challenges to Trump’s executive order, including a contentious stipulation that all mailed ballots must be received by election day, rather than merely postmarked.
Responses and Ongoing Legal Battles
A request for comment from the White House went unanswered. Legal experts indicate that this ruling not only reinforces democratic principles but also encourages civic engagement by ensuring that voting remains accessible and fair for all Americans.
Furthermore, various lawsuits against Trump’s election executive order are still progressing. This includes a separate case initiated by 19 Democratic state attorneys general, alongside lawsuits from Washington and Oregon, where mail-in voting is predominant.
