President Donald Trump’s contentious executive order, which was released on Friday, was overturned by a federal judge, who determined that it probably violated the Constitution and violated the power of the states over elections. A partnership of Democrat state attorneys general argued that the attempt was an illegal attempt to supersede state election laws, and US District Judge Denise J. Casper in Massachusetts obtained a preliminary injunction against the March 25 order. Judge Casper wrote in her decision that” the Constitution does not give the President any certain rights over votes.” Trump’s decree aimed to enact some sweeping changes to federal elections, including requiring voter registration through mail-in ballots after Election Day and establishing a tie between federal election grants and state ‘ compliance with the new regulations. The state suing the order claimed that it “usurps the States ‘ democratic power” and “demands to amend election laws by fiat.” The Biden administration, which had the prosecution, did not agree with Trump’s order. Trump and his allies have argued that the order is necessary to secure elections, with the White House at the time defending it as” standing up for free, honest, and fair elections” Casper said the states had shown a “likelihood of achievement” in their legal challenges and acknowledged their concerns about the administrative and financial problem the order may impose. She also made note of the fact that national voter registration forms now state that they are citizens of the United States and that noncitizen ballot is already prohibited by federal law. This is Trump’s buy dealt a second criminal blow. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., had previously blocked portions of the policy, including the proof-of-citizenship requirement. Trump’s long-standing allegations of voter fraud have been refuted by independent investigations and numerous state-led investigations, which are the inspiration for the purchase. Trump has continued to support unfounded claims about election integrity, including misleading claims about voting systems and improper vote, after losing the 2020 election. Critics contend that the executive order threatens to alienate voters, especially in says like Oregon and Washington, which greatly rely on mail-in election. These states argued in a separate legal issue that the purchase may prevent the counting of tons of ballots that had been postmarked on Election Day but had not been received by then. More than 300, 000 of these votes arrived late in Washington solely in 2024. Republican election leaders in some states, who claimed Trump’s attempt would allow them to obtain federal voting records while preventing voting fraud. However, legal experts have cautioned that the president does not have the authority to impose for nationwide election laws, which are only available to states, and that Congress is limited to making decisions in federal elections. BridgetO’Hickey, a lawyer for the Department of Justice, asserted in a court hearing earlier this month that the buy was intended to establish uniform requirements across states and that concerns about costs and feasibility were dismissed as fanciful. Judge Casper noted that late-arriving vote now need a stamp before or on Election Day, and any received after that with early postmarks are not taken into account. However, she also suggested that late-arriving votes may be tampered with. The outcome of Friday’s ruling leaves the fate of Trump’s order uncertain and strengthens state officials ‘ efforts to maintain control over their own election processes.
