Judge Blocks Trump’s Citizenship Proof Requirement for Federal Voting Forms

In a significant legal decision, a federal judge has blocked the implementation of a documentary proof of citizenship requirement for federal voter registration forms. This ruling comes as a setback to President Donald Trump’s administration, which sought to enforce the requirement as part of an initiative to overhaul U.S. elections.

Judge’s Ruling Against Trump’s Citizenship Requirement

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, located in Washington, D.C., issued her ruling on Friday. She sided with a coalition of Democratic and civil rights organizations that had filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration. The judge declared that the proof-of-citizenship directive infringes upon the separation of powers as outlined in the Constitution.

Key Points from the Ruling

• The ruling states that election regulation is primarily the responsibility of the states and Congress.
• Judge Kollar-Kotelly emphasized that the President has no authority to impose such voter registration changes.
• The U.S. Election Assistance Commission is permanently barred from implementing the proof-of-citizenship requirement.

Sophia Lin Lakin from the ACLU, one of the plaintiffs, hailed the decision as a victory for democracy. She described the attempt to impose a citizenship requirement as an unconstitutional power grab by the President.

Background on Citizenship Requirements

Documentary proof of citizenship requirements have faced considerable challenges and controversies. While the U.S. House passed a mandate last year, it has yet to gain traction in the Senate. At the state level, these requirements have often resulted in confusion and obstacles for voters.

• In New Hampshire, a proof-of-citizenship requirement was implemented during local elections, causing significant confusion.
• Kansas had a similar requirement for three years, leading to chaos and the disenfranchisement of approximately 30,000 eligible voters.

Voting by noncitizens has been documented as exceedingly rare, undermining the justification for such strict requirements. The ongoing lawsuit against Trump’s executive order will also address other aspects of voting regulations, including a mandate for all mailed ballots to be received by Election Day.

Future of the Legal Battle

Additional legal challenges to Trump’s executive order are also underway. In April, 19 Democratic state attorneys general urged a federal court to reject the order. Furthermore, Washington and Oregon have initiated lawsuits against it, particularly given their reliance on mail-in voting.

As this case progresses, the implications for voting rights and election integrity will remain a focal point of discussion among lawmakers and civil rights advocates.