Trump Enacts Broad Executive Order Affecting Election Regulations
Election law experts promptly raised concerns regarding the legality of the order.
TroibNews 
On Tuesday, President Donald Trump signed a comprehensive executive order aimed at overhauling election administration nationwide, focusing particularly on citizenship verification and mail-in voting regulations.
The order raised immediate alarms among voting rights advocates, who argued that the president might not possess the legal authority to implement several provisions outlined in the directive. If enacted, the order could significantly impact how Americans cast their votes and how their ballots are counted, potentially disenfranchising a considerable number of legitimate voters in the pursuit of preventing even a single illegitimate vote.
Trump’s executive order claims that federal law mandates all states to discard ballots that are not received by Election Day, instructing the Justice Department to “take all necessary action to enforce” this stipulation. This seemed to particularly target states that heavily utilize mail-in voting, from California to Alaska.
States across the nation have considerable freedom to manage their elections differently; however, no state allows votes cast after Election Day to be counted. While some states accept absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive later, others require that ballots be in the hands of election officials by the close of polls. For instance, in Florida, ballots must be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day, whereas in California, ballots must be postmarked on Election Day but can be counted if they arrive up to seven days later.
Numerous legal challenges have emerged concerning the debate over “received by” versus “postmarked” ballots, but federal law has not specifically prohibited states from accepting ballots that are timely postmarked yet arrive late.
Trump has consistently criticized voting methods he perceives as unfavorable, including mail voting. Following the 2020 election, he has maintained that it was rigged against him, prompting calls for changes to electoral laws, some of which were outlined in Tuesday’s order.
The executive order also mandates that the Election Assistance Commission, an independent body, incorporate proof of citizenship into the national voter registration form. Federal law requires states to accept this national form, but they are still permitted to design their own voter registration documents.
For certain demographics, including low-income individuals, a proof of citizenship requirement could create significant barriers to voting. Given that voter fraud is exceedingly rare, the order might lead to more disenfranchisement of lawful voters than it would prevent instances of illegitimate voting. Additionally, another portion of the order enables the Department of Justice, with assistance from the Department of Homeland Security, to potentially subpoena states to scrutinize voter rolls for compliance with federal laws.
Should states fail to adhere to the new directives, they could lose federal funding, as stated in the order.
In his remarks during the signing ceremony at the White House, the president cited ongoing concerns within the right wing as justification for these changes, asserting, “Election fraud. You’ve heard the term. We’ll end it, hopefully. At least, this will go a long way toward ending it.” He added, “We got to straighten out our elections.”
However, election law experts who have highlighted the rarity of voter fraud and the rigorous prosecution of such cases expressed immediate concern about the order and questioned Trump’s legal authority to instruct the commission.
“Even putting aside the substance, there’s a huge question about whether Trump can direct the EAC to do anything,” said UCLA Law professor Rick Hasen. “I think the answer is no. But this may well be tested in court.”
Election lawyer Justin Levitt, who previously served as a voting rights adviser under Joe Biden, supported Hasen’s concerns, commenting, “the vast majority of what it does is not lawful.” He also expressed skepticism about the likelihood of the Election Assistance Commission complying with the order, stating, “I don’t think there will be three votes to execute what the president has purported to require.”
Hasen further remarked that any alteration to the voter registration form would be “huge,” characterizing the order as an attempt to bypass Congress and implement proposals from the Republican-led SAVE Act, which demands proof of citizenship for federal elections. Current federal law established the national voter registration form, which requires applicants to declare under penalty of perjury that they are eligible citizens.
“I don’t think that Trump has the power to do that, but if he did it would affect millions of registered voters’ ability to register and vote in federal elections,” Hasen concluded.
Ian Smith for TROIB News
The order raised immediate alarms among voting rights advocates, who argued that the president might not possess the legal authority to implement several provisions outlined in the directive. If enacted, the order could significantly impact how Americans cast their votes and how their ballots are counted, potentially disenfranchising a considerable number of legitimate voters in the pursuit of preventing even a single illegitimate vote.
Trump’s executive order claims that federal law mandates all states to discard ballots that are not received by Election Day, instructing the Justice Department to “take all necessary action to enforce” this stipulation. This seemed to particularly target states that heavily utilize mail-in voting, from California to Alaska.
States across the nation have considerable freedom to manage their elections differently; however, no state allows votes cast after Election Day to be counted. While some states accept absentee ballots that are postmarked by Election Day but arrive later, others require that ballots be in the hands of election officials by the close of polls. For instance, in Florida, ballots must be received by 7 p.m. on Election Day, whereas in California, ballots must be postmarked on Election Day but can be counted if they arrive up to seven days later.
Numerous legal challenges have emerged concerning the debate over “received by” versus “postmarked” ballots, but federal law has not specifically prohibited states from accepting ballots that are timely postmarked yet arrive late.
Trump has consistently criticized voting methods he perceives as unfavorable, including mail voting. Following the 2020 election, he has maintained that it was rigged against him, prompting calls for changes to electoral laws, some of which were outlined in Tuesday’s order.
The executive order also mandates that the Election Assistance Commission, an independent body, incorporate proof of citizenship into the national voter registration form. Federal law requires states to accept this national form, but they are still permitted to design their own voter registration documents.
For certain demographics, including low-income individuals, a proof of citizenship requirement could create significant barriers to voting. Given that voter fraud is exceedingly rare, the order might lead to more disenfranchisement of lawful voters than it would prevent instances of illegitimate voting. Additionally, another portion of the order enables the Department of Justice, with assistance from the Department of Homeland Security, to potentially subpoena states to scrutinize voter rolls for compliance with federal laws.
Should states fail to adhere to the new directives, they could lose federal funding, as stated in the order.
In his remarks during the signing ceremony at the White House, the president cited ongoing concerns within the right wing as justification for these changes, asserting, “Election fraud. You’ve heard the term. We’ll end it, hopefully. At least, this will go a long way toward ending it.” He added, “We got to straighten out our elections.”
However, election law experts who have highlighted the rarity of voter fraud and the rigorous prosecution of such cases expressed immediate concern about the order and questioned Trump’s legal authority to instruct the commission.
“Even putting aside the substance, there’s a huge question about whether Trump can direct the EAC to do anything,” said UCLA Law professor Rick Hasen. “I think the answer is no. But this may well be tested in court.”
Election lawyer Justin Levitt, who previously served as a voting rights adviser under Joe Biden, supported Hasen’s concerns, commenting, “the vast majority of what it does is not lawful.” He also expressed skepticism about the likelihood of the Election Assistance Commission complying with the order, stating, “I don’t think there will be three votes to execute what the president has purported to require.”
Hasen further remarked that any alteration to the voter registration form would be “huge,” characterizing the order as an attempt to bypass Congress and implement proposals from the Republican-led SAVE Act, which demands proof of citizenship for federal elections. Current federal law established the national voter registration form, which requires applicants to declare under penalty of perjury that they are eligible citizens.
“I don’t think that Trump has the power to do that, but if he did it would affect millions of registered voters’ ability to register and vote in federal elections,” Hasen concluded.
Ian Smith for TROIB News
