NEW YORK — President Donald Trump has signed an executive order intended to significantly reshape the framework of federal elections in the United States. The action, dated March 25, 2025, includes a mandate for voters to present documentary proof of citizenship to register for federal elections and outlines strict deadlines for ballot submissions.
The order argues that the U.S. has "failed to enforce basic and necessary election protections," pushing states to collaborate more closely with federal authorities or risk losing federal funding. Specifically, it threatens those jurisdictions that do not comply with the new rules, which demand that all ballots be received by Election Day.
As Trump stated while signing the order, “Election fraud. You've heard the term. We're going to end it, hopefully. At least this will go a long way toward ending it.” His comments came in light of continuing allegations he’s made regarding the integrity of U.S. elections, particularly following his losing bid against Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Trump has consistently asserted that he lost due to widespread fraud, a claim that has repeatedly been debunked.
The requirement for documentary proof of citizenship raises significant concerns among voting rights advocates. According to a report from the Brennan Center for Justice, approximately 9% of U.S. citizens of voting age, equating to around 21.3 million people, do not readily possess documentation proving their citizenship. This includes individuals who may have encountered challenges due to changes in marital status affecting name documentation.
Significantly, the order aims to adjust existing protocols concerning mail-in ballots. Currently, 18 states, along with Puerto Rico, accept ballots that are mailed after Election Day, provided they are postmarked by that date. Trump’s directive, however, would limit eligibility by requiring that all ballots must be received on or before Election Day, a move that experts warn could further disenfranchise voters.
Concerns were echoed by experts in the field, who noted the risks posed by such changes. Wendy Weiser from the Brennan Center stated, “The president cannot override a statute passed by Congress that says what is required to register to vote on the federal voter registration form.” Furthermore, legal experts like UCLA’s Rick Hasen have highlighted that elections fall predominantly under the jurisdiction of state governments, suggesting that the order would represent a radical shift of power to the federal level if enforced.
The executive order’s feedback has been decidedly mixed among lawmakers. Some Republican leaders such as Rep. Bryan Steil from Wisconsin welcomed the move, suggesting it’s a proactive step to secure elections and curb alleged foreign interference. Conversely, Democratic leaders condemned it as an unlawful power grab. Jena Griswold, Colorado's Democratic secretary of state, labeled it “an unlawful weaponization of the federal government,” expressing apprehensions that it would hinder voter engagement.
The controversy surrounding Trump's executive action is further inflamed by the backdrop of previous attempts to pass voter ID laws, which have frequently failed in Congress due to Democratic opposition that cites statistical evidence – like the lack of enhanced licenses or passports – preventing many Americans from meeting such requirements.
Trump's order arrives in tandem with renewed efforts by the Republican National Committee (RNC) to investigate voter registration roll maintenance processes across the country. The RNC has submitted public records requests for documents pertaining to how 48 states and Washington, D.C. manage their voter rolls, as part of a broader initiative to ensure that ineligible individuals, including deceased citizens and non-citizens, are removed from voter lists.
In the wake of the signing of the executive action, observers are bracing for legal challenges. Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and several Democratic attorneys have vowed to push back against the order in court, as the intricacies of electoral law and state rights conflict with the executive’s proposed modifications. Legal experts predict that these challenges could significantly delay or even halt implementation of the new measures.
Despite criticism, Trump remains steadfast in his agenda concerning election reforms. Echoing sentiments of needing to safeguard against fraud, Trump has hinted at potential follow-up actions to solidify the intentions behind the executive order. The landscape of federal electoral policy is primed for turbulence as various stakeholders prepare for a legal battle that could reshape how elections are conducted going forward.
As events unfold, the implications of Trump's move resonate beyond mere policy adjustments, hinting at a deeper, more contentious debate on voting rights in the United States and the balance of power between federal oversight and state autonomy regarding elections.
