President Donald Trump suffered another courtroom setback Wednesday after a federal judge permanently blocked major portions of his executive order designed to reshape federal election procedures.
The ruling prevents the administration from enforcing several provisions of the order, including a proposal that would require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections.
The decision marks another chapter in the ongoing legal battle over election laws, voting procedures, and the limits of presidential authority.
Federal Judge Blocks Key Election Changes
U.S. District Judge Denise Casper ruled that the Constitution gives states and Congress—not the president—the primary authority to regulate elections.
Her decision makes permanent a preliminary injunction issued last year that had already paused much of Trump’s election order while the lawsuit proceeded.
Writing for the court, Casper concluded that the executive branch cannot unilaterally rewrite election rules through executive action.
“The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” the judge wrote.
What Trump’s Executive Order Would Have Changed
The executive order proposed several significant election reforms.
Among them were:
- Requiring documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote.
- Preventing states from counting mailed ballots that arrive after Election Day, even if they were postmarked on time.
- Allowing the federal government to withhold certain funding from states that refused to comply with the new requirements.
The Trump administration argued the changes were intended to strengthen election integrity and create more uniform voting standards nationwide.
Court Rejects White House Argument
Administration attorneys argued the lawsuit was filed too early because many of the proposed changes had not yet taken effect.
Judge Casper disagreed, ruling that the constitutional questions were already ripe for review because the executive order attempted to exercise powers reserved for Congress and the states.
Democratic Attorneys General Praise The Decision
Several Democratic attorneys general welcomed the ruling.
New York Attorney General Letitia James called the decision an important defense of the Constitution and existing election laws.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, whose office led the lawsuit, said the ruling reaffirmed that states and Congress are responsible for setting election rules.
As of Wednesday evening, neither the White House nor the U.S. Department of Justice had publicly responded to the decision.
More Legal Battles Are Still Ahead
Wednesday’s ruling is only one of several legal challenges facing Trump’s election agenda.
Earlier court decisions have already blocked efforts to add proof-of-citizenship requirements to the federal voter registration form and prevented similar requirements for military personnel requesting absentee ballots.
Meanwhile, President Trump continues pushing Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, legislation that would establish a nationwide proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration.
The bill has already passed the House but remains stalled in the Senate.
Earlier Wednesday, Trump also postponed signing a bipartisan housing package, saying he wanted Congress to act on election security legislation before moving forward with additional bills.
Supreme Court Could Soon Weigh In
Another major election case is now awaiting a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court.
The justices are expected to rule on whether states may continue counting mailed ballots that arrive after Election Day if they were mailed on time.
That decision could immediately affect election procedures in 14 states that currently allow post-Election Day ballot deadlines.
With multiple lawsuits still pending and Congress divided over election legislation, the debate over voting rules is expected to remain one of the biggest political stories heading into the midterm elections.
For now, Judge Casper’s ruling leaves most of Trump’s original election executive order blocked unless a higher court overturns the decision on appeal.