A group of 19 Democratic attorneys general is challenging the Trump administration over its sweeping executive order targeting election rules and administration across the country. The attorneys general argue in the suit that President Donald Trump lacks the authority to request several key components of the order, such as requiring documentary proof of citizenship for the national voter registration form or mandating mail-in ballots to arrive on Election Day.
Legal Challenge Against Trump’s Order
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Massachusetts, emphasizes that the President has no power to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements or modify state mail-ballot procedures. The New York Attorney General Letitia James stated, “Donald Trump’s attempt to control our elections, intimidate voters, and limit Americans’ right to vote is unconstitutional, undemocratic, and un-American.”
This legal battle marks at least the second lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, signed on March 25. The order, aimed at changing how elections are administered, especially rules related to citizenship and mail-in voting, has raised questions of legality.
Implications of the Legal Battle
The sweeping order seeks to combat “election fraud,” a term Trump frequently cites without substantial evidence. The attorneys general argue that requiring documentary proof of citizenship would burden voter registration systems and potentially disenfranchise lawful voters.
The lawsuit underscores that states have the authority to administer elections differently, but none allow votes to be counted after Election Day. By circumventing state procedures and making changes to federal elections, Trump is accused of overstepping his limits of Presidential power.
The legal battle signifies a clash between state autonomy in election administration and federal intervention under the Trump administration’s directives.
