Federal Judge Permanently Blocks Trump’s Election Order On Proof-Of-Citizenship Requirement

Washington: A federal judge on Wednesday permanently barred President Donald Trump’s administration from implementing most of his first executive order on elections, part of which sought to require people to show documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Denise Casper in Boston effectively converts a preliminary injunction she issued a year ago, in which she temporarily blocked many of Trump’s efforts to overhaul elections, into a permanent ban.

Casper rejected the Republican administration’s argument that the lawsuit to block the changes brought by Democratic state attorneys general was premature because the rules had yet to be put in place. Instead, she agreed that the Constitution gives states and Congress the authority to regulate elections, and that Trump’s requirements violated the separation of powers.

The Constitution “does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” wrote Casper, who was nominated by former Democratic President Barack Obama.

Among other proposed changes, Trump’s order would have required people to provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote, prevented mail ballots from being counted if they arrive after Election Day, even if they were postmarked by then, and punished states that failed to comply by withholding certain federal grants, including those intended to beef up election security.

In a statement, New York Attorney General Letitia James said she was grateful the court had blocked Trump’s “unconstitutional attempt to seize control of our elections” and would continue to defend voting rights in this year’s midterm elections.

“Generations of Americans fought tirelessly for the right to vote, and we honor their legacy by protecting that right against anyone who tries to undermine it,” said James, a Democrat.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose state was the lead plaintiff in the case, said the ruling reaffirmed the constitutional principle that it’s up to the states and Congress to set election rules.

“While we are proud of this result, we are clear-eyed that President Trump’s attacks on voting rights and our elections show no signs of slowing down,” Bonta, a Democrat, said in a statement. “So let me be clear: we will keep fighting back every step of the way.”

In a statement, a White House spokeswoman said the Republican president wants to ensure that Americans are confident in the way elections are administered. The administration can appeal Wednesday’s ruling if it chooses.

“The President’s executive order lawfully protects our elections, and we are confident that we will ultimately prevail in its implementation,” spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said.

The ruling was the latest in a series against the election executive order Trump signed just months after taking office for his second term. He has since signed another executive order on elections that seeks to create a national voter list and limit mail balloting. That directive also faces multiple legal challenges.

Last fall, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., overseeing a separate challenge to the first election executive order by civil rights and Democratic Party-aligned groups blocked the government from taking steps to include the proof-of-citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form. That judge later barred Trump’s defense secretary from requiring documentary proof of citizenship when military personnel register to vote or request ballots.

In an apparent nod to the difficulty of implementing a proof-of-citizen requirement by executive order, Trump is pushing legislation in the Republican-controlled Congress to create such a mandate. The SAVE America Act has passed the House but has stalled in the Senate, leading Trump to advocate for eliminating the filibuster that is blocking the legislation.

On Wednesday, he abruptly canceled the expected signing of a bipartisan housing bill, saying he would not sign legislation until Congress passes his proof of citizenship requirement for voting.

Enacting a proof-of-citizenship requirement to vote can be complicated, especially if it’s done on the eve of a major election with little time for states or voters to adjust.

A 2025 University of Maryland study estimates that 21.3 million Americans who are eligible to vote do not have — or don’t have easy access to — documents to prove their citizenship. That includes nearly 10% of Democrats, 7% of Republicans and 14% of people unaffiliated with either major party.

Only about half of Americans have a passport, which can take four to six weeks to obtain and cost around $165. And the processing time for an online birth certificate can take anywhere from a few days to 12 weeks. Married women who have changed their names might need additional documentation, such as a marriage certificate.

A proof-of-citizenship requirement that passed in Kansas 15 years ago ended up blocking the voter registrations of more than 31,000 U.S. citizens who were otherwise eligible to vote before the law was halted by the courts.

The president and many of his Republican allies have been promoting the narrative that voting by noncitizens is a major problem, when in fact it’s quite rare. The federal voter registration form already requires people to attest that they are U.S. citizens. Violating that is punishable as a felony that can lead to prison or deportation.

In another major voting case, the U.S. Supreme Court is due to issue an opinion soon on whether mail ballots must arrive by Election Day. That could immediately change the rules in 14 states that allow grace periods ranging from days to weeks if the ballots are postmarked by Election Day.