Controversial Executive Order Sparks Debate on Election Integrity
Last Tuesday, President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at overhauling the U.S. election system, a move that critics argue could pose significant risks to voter rights and election security. The order, which claims to extend presidential control over federal elections, is alleged to violate the Constitution and several federal laws by bypassing Congress, the states, and an independent bipartisan federal agency.
Concurrently, Congress is deliberating the SAVE Act, a bill that would mandate Americans to present documents like a passport or birth certificate for voter registration. Both initiatives are criticized for being rooted in unfounded claims about election integrity.
Numerous lawsuits have been filed to challenge the legality of this executive order, including a prominent case by the Brennan Center and other voting rights organizations.
What the Executive Order Proposes
The executive order mandates several changes in election procedures, effectively placing the election system under presidential oversight.
“Show-your-papers” Requirement
One of the most contentious provisions of the order is the requirement for citizens to present a passport or equivalent document to register to vote. Since only about half of Americans possess a passport, this measure could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Research indicates that younger Americans, people of color, and lower-income voters are less likely to have such documents readily available. Additionally, married women who have changed their names may face challenges due to mismatched documentation.
This directive also attempts to compel the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to modify federal voter registration forms, a power the president does not possess under law. States resisting these changes would risk losing federal funding.
Impact on Military and Overseas Voters
The order imposes additional barriers for Americans living abroad, including military personnel, by requiring them to prove their eligibility in their voting state. These new burdens are described as both impractical and unfair.
Voting System Decertification
The order calls for the decertification of all state voting systems within 180 days unless they meet new federal standards, which no current system satisfies. Such a move could cost states billions and significantly impact upcoming elections.
Access to Voter Data
The executive order also proposes granting Elon Musk’s DOGE and the Department of Homeland Security access to sensitive voter files, raising serious privacy concerns. This access could lead to interference in voter rolls and undermine public trust in election integrity.
Changes to Mail and Absentee Ballot Deadlines
Further, the order seeks to penalize states that count mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day but received afterward. The authority to impose such penalties is outside the president’s jurisdiction, as these decisions are governed by state law.
State Cooperation and Federal Funding
Finally, the order attempts to coerce states into sharing information with the Department of Justice by threatening to withhold federal law enforcement grants. However, courts have previously ruled that the president cannot condition the disbursement of funds allocated by Congress.
Legal Implications of the Executive Order
The executive order is widely considered to be in violation of both federal law and the U.S. Constitution. The president does not have the unilateral authority to change election laws, a power reserved for Congress and state legislatures. The U.S. Constitution’s Elections Clause outlines that election rules must be prescribed by state legislatures, with Congress able to alter these rules through legislation. Presidential overreach in this context is predicted to face legal challenges.
Moreover, the order’s attempt to direct the EAC, an independent agency, oversteps presidential powers. Even if the EAC were to act independently, it is prohibited from introducing requirements for citizenship documents under current federal law.
The executive order’s provisions related to the withholding of congressional funds are also legally questionable. The U.S. Constitution assigns the power of the purse exclusively to Congress.
Comparison with the SAVE Act
The executive order shares similarities with the proposed SAVE Act, particularly the proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration. However, unlike the SAVE Act, which allows for birth certificates, the executive order primarily mandates passports or similar documents. Both measures could significantly impede voter registration for millions of citizens.
The SAVE Act has faced significant opposition due to its potential impact on voter accessibility, including for married women with mismatched documentation. The executive order is seen as an attempt to implement similar measures without legislative approval.
Efforts to improve election administration remain essential, but critics argue that such sweeping changes via executive order could have detrimental effects on voter participation and election integrity nationwide.
