A federal judge has ruled against President Donald Trump’s attempt to mandate documentary proof of citizenship for federal voter registration. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly delivered the decision in Washington, D.C. on Friday, effectively blocking enforcement of this requirement.
Judge’s Ruling on Proof of Citizenship Requirement
Judge Kollar-Kotelly’s ruling came in response to a lawsuit filed by Democratic and civil rights organizations. These groups challenged Trump’s executive order aimed at reforming U.S. elections. The judge stated that the directive violated the separation of powers outlined in the Constitution.
Constitutional Concerns
In her opinion, Kollar-Kotelly emphasized that the Constitution assigns election regulation authority to the states and Congress. She noted that President Trump lacks the power to impose changes to voting qualifications.
- The ruling grants a partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs.
- It prevents the scope of the proof-of-citizenship requirement from materializing.
- The U.S. Election Assistance Commission is barred from attempting to implement this requirement.
Implications of the Ruling
Sophia Lin Lakin, an attorney from the ACLU, described the ruling as a significant victory for democracy. She labeled Trump’s attempt to impose such a requirement as an illegal overreach of presidential authority.
Despite being a key priority for many Republicans, similar attempts at introducing proof-of-citizenship mandates have met significant resistance. Last spring, the U.S. House approved legislation related to citizenship requirements, but the Senate has stalled its progress.
Challenges at the State Level
When proof-of-citizenship requirements have been implemented at the state level, they have often led to confusion and complications for voters. Notably:
- Requirements that arose in New Hampshire created confusion during local elections.
- Kansas experienced turmoil for three years when a similar requirement was enacted, leading to the disenfranchisement of about 30,000 eligible voters.
Furthermore, documented cases show that voting by non-citizens is exceedingly rare.
Ongoing Legal Challenges
The lawsuit initiated by the Democratic National Committee and civil rights organizations continues, as additional challenges to Trump’s executive order loom. Among these is a requirement for all mail-in ballots to be received by Election Day instead of merely postmarked.
As legal battles over voter registration and election laws unfold, multiple lawsuits against Trump’s executive order are underway. In early April, 19 Democratic state attorneys general filed a petition in a separate federal court to invalidate the order. States like Washington and Oregon have also joined in legal challenges, particularly concerning mail-in voting.
