A Barack Obama-appointed federal judge on Wednesday, June 24, made permanent her earlier block on key parts of President Donald Trump’s first executive order on elections, preventing the administration from requiring documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration and other changes.
Judge Makes Injunction Against Trump Election Order Permanent
U.S. District Court Judge Denise Casper in Boston ruled that the president overstepped his authority. The Constitution leaves election rules mainly to states and Congress, she said, and does not give the president specific powers in this area.
The decision turns last year’s temporary injunction into a lasting one. It covers major pieces of the order Trump signed months after taking office for his second term.
Those included directions to add proof-of-citizenship requirements to the federal voter registration form, restrictions on counting mail ballots received after Election Day, even if postmarked on time, and threats to withhold federal funds from states that did not go along.
Also Read: Speaker Johnson Vows to Advance SAVE America Act Through Reconciliation 3.0
Casper rejected the administration’s claim that the challenge from Democratic state attorneys general came too soon, before any rules took effect.
She found the states faced real harm and that the order violated the separation of powers.
California led the lawsuit, joined by 18 other states. California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the ruling a clear statement that states and Congress set election rules, not the president.
New York Attorney General Letitia James said it stopped an unconstitutional effort to take control of elections.
States and Voting Rights Advocates Challenge Executive Action
This marks one of several court losses for Trump’s first election order. A judge in Washington, D.C., previously blocked parts of it, including proof-of-citizenship steps for the federal form and for military voters.
Trump has pushed a second executive order on elections that aims to establish a national voter list and impose further limits on mail balloting. That one also faces lawsuits.
Republicans, including Trump, argue that noncitizen voting poses a serious risk and that proof of citizenship is basic common sense.
The current federal registration form already requires people to swear they are citizens, with felony penalties for lying. Studies and officials have described actual cases of noncitizen voting as rare.
Democrats Say Citizenship Requirements Could Disenfranchise Eligible Voters
Democrats and voting rights groups say the requirements would create unnecessary hurdles for millions of eligible citizens who lack easy access to passports, birth certificates, or other documents.
Trump has also backed legislation in Congress. The SAVE America Act passed the House but has stalled in the Senate. It would require proof of citizenship for federal voter registration.
On Wednesday, Trump said he would not sign a bipartisan housing bill until Congress passes it. He has called for ending the filibuster to clear the way.
Court Ruling Arrives Amid Major Election Law Battles
Casper, named to the bench by former President Barack Obama, serves as chief judge for the District of Massachusetts.
The ruling comes as the Supreme Court prepares to decide a related case on mail ballot deadlines. That outcome could affect rules in states that allow ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive later.
Election administration has long been a state responsibility, with Congress setting some national standards through laws like the National Voter Registration Act.
Also Read: Trump Erupts at Sen. Cassidy Over Iran War Powers in Heated GOP Lunch Clash
A president can tell federal agencies what forms to use and how to enforce laws, but he can’t change core state election processes by executive order alone.
Both sides agree that only citizens should vote. The fight centers on how best to verify that without creating new barriers for legitimate voters.
States already use various checks, from affidavits to cross-checks with other records. A handful require stricter proof at registration.
Existing Election Rules Remain in Place Ahead of Midterms
Wednesday’s decision does not touch state-level efforts or the separate legislative push. It focuses on what the president tried to do through executive action.
The permanent injunction keeps the status quo on the challenged parts of the first order.
Ahead of the looming midterms in November, states will continue running elections under their existing rules and federal statutes already on the books.
