Despite Court Order, Trump Election Threat Remains as States Follow ‘Marching Orders’

WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of key provisions of President Trump’s recent executive order reshaping U.S. elections.

The ruling comes as state lawmakers advance similar proposals through state legislation. So far this year, 24 states have considered legislation that would impose or expand proof of citizenship mandates, while 16 states have bills to move up their ballot return deadline – two primary tenets of President Trump’s executive order.

Voting Rights Lab Co-Founder and Chief Operating Officer Samantha Tarazi issued the following statement in response: 

“To President Trump, whether the executive order would survive legal scrutiny was beside the point. The goal was to send a clear directive to his allies in the states — and in Congress — outlining precisely how the president wants them to change their laws, and they are already following his marching orders. 

“No matter what happens in this court case, if Trump’s election agenda ultimately prevails at the state-level, our American tradition of free and fair elections is under serious threat.”

Key Facts

• In blocking the proof of citizenship provisions of Trump’s executive order, Judge Kolar-Kotelly noted President Trump’s overreach, stating: “Our Constitution entrusts Congress and the States — not the President — with the authority to regulate federal elections…[N]o statutory delegation of authority to the Executive Branch permits the President to short-circuit Congress’s deliberative process by executive order.”

• A rigorous set of checks and balances exist in every state to ensure that only U.S. citizens can vote in federal and statewide elections. When registering or when someone votes for the first time, Americans generally must provide either a Social Security number or an official state ID like a driver’s license, which election officials can use to confirm their citizenship status. This has been federal law for over 20 years.

• Millions upon millions of voting-eligible U.S. citizens do not have ready access to the types of documents they would need to prove their citizenship status. More than 132 million U.S. citizens do not have a current passport, and nearly 70 million women do not have a birth certificate that matches their current legal name.

• Voter ID laws are not the same as documentary proof of citizenship requirements — nearly nine in 10 Americans have a driver’s license, while just about half hold a passport.

• Research shows states where President Trump performed best in 2024 have the lowest number of citizens with valid passports, while Democratic-leaning states tend to have the highest number of U.S. citizens with valid passports.
  
• Every state which has tried to implement a documentary proof of citizenship mandate has encountered administrative chaos, costly litigation, and significant disenfranchisement of eligible U.S. citizens. For example, Kansas briefly had a state law requiring new voter registrants to provide documentary proof of citizenship, and one in eight eligible U.S. citizens who attempted to register to vote over a three year period were erroneously blocked.  Consequently, a federal court stopped implementation of the law, finding it violated the U.S. constitution and federal law. 

---

Voting Rights Lab is a nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that brings state policy and legislative expertise to the fight for voting rights. We work in partnership with organizations across the country to secure, protect, and defend the voting rights of all Americans. And we track voting laws and legislation in all 50 states at tracker.votingrightslab.org.

---