Trump election executive order blocked as judge bars proof-of-citizenship voting requirement

A US federal judge has permanently stopped President Donald Trumps administration from enforcing most parts of his first executive order on elections. The order included a plan to make voters show documents proving citizenship when registering. The decision also blocks other election changes set out in the order, according to the ruling from Boston.

Representative image

US District Court Judge Denise Casper said the US Constitution leaves election control to states and Congress. Casper said Trumps order broke the separation of powers. Casper wrote, "The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,\" when explaining the limits on presidential authority.

Trump executive order on elections and states’ authority

Casper’s ruling turned a temporary order into a lasting ban. A year earlier, Casper issued a preliminary injunction that paused many parts of Trumps election overhaul. The new order makes that earlier block permanent. It means the administration cannot carry out most of the changes listed in the executive order.

The Republican administration argued the lawsuit was too early. The administration said the case should wait because the new rules were not yet active. Casper rejected that view. Casper agreed the Democratic state attorneys general could challenge the order now, given the constitutional issues raised.

Trump executive order on elections and proposed rule changes

Trumps order proposed several new requirements for voting and ballot counting. It would have required documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration. It also aimed to stop counting mail ballots that arrive after Election Day. This would apply even when ballots were postmarked by Election Day.

The order also threatened states over compliance. It proposed penalties by holding back certain federal money from states that did not follow the new rules. The lawsuit was brought by Democratic state attorneys general. California was the lead plaintiff in the case, according to statements after the ruling.

Trump executive order on elections and reactions from attorneys general

In a statement, New York Attorney General Letitia James welcomed the decision. James said, \"she was grateful the court had blocked Trumps unconstitutional attempt to seize control of our elections\" and added the state would keep protecting voting rights. James also said the work would continue during \"this years midterm elections.\"

James linked the ruling to the history of voting rights. James said, \"Generations of Americans fought tirelessly for the right to vote, and we honour their legacy by protecting that right against anyone who tries to undermine it,\" according to the statement released after the court decision.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta said the decision backed states and Congress on election rules. Bonta said the ruling reaffirmed the constitutional principle behind election law. Bonta also warned about future disputes. Bonta said, \"While we are proud of this result, we are clear-eyed that President Trumps attacks on voting rights and our elections show no signs of slowing down,\"

Bonta said the legal fight would continue after this decision. Bonta added, \"So let me be clear: we will keep fighting back every step of the way.\" The ruling leaves the earlier order in place and keeps most of the executive order blocked. It also confirms the court view that election powers rest outside the presidency.

With inputs from PTI