Back in March, Trump attempted to rewrite several election laws via his preferred method of bypassing democratic oversight: an executive order. By April, the federal courts began passing injunctions that pause a number of the order’s provisions, for one very solid reason: The president has no authority to change election laws. The states and the U.S. Congress may change those laws, but not the person occupying the White House.
The American Spark looks at a short, informative study released a few days ago by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). The six-page report lays out the current election laws that Trump is aching to change, the basics of his executive order, and precisely why the courts are questioning its legality.
Today, the Spark provides quotes from the study that give a detailed run-down of what is found in Trump’s executive order.
A few day ago, the Spark offered quotes from the CRS study that discussed the laws Trump is interested in changing. About two days from now, we’ll end the look into the federal report by offering readers its statements on the pending legal challenges and issues for Congress to consider.
Below, the Spark offers the CRS report’s rundown of Trump’s executive order on elections:
Executive Order 14248
“EO 14248 states that certain aspects of American elections—such as ‘self-attestation for citizenship,’ ‘patchwork [] voting methods,’ and ‘mass voting by mail’—threaten the integrity of the elections process, and it orders a variety of actions to be taken to address these matters. As discussed below, whether the EO’s provisions amount to ‘requirements’ or ‘suggestions’ is at issue in LULAC v. Executive Office of the President and related litigation.
“Section 2 of the EO contains various provisions aimed at ‘enforc[ing] the Federal prohibition on foreign nationals voting in Federal elections.’ Section 2(a) states that the EAC ‘shall take appropriate action to require, in its national mail voter registration form,’ documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. Section 2(b) states that federal officials shall open certain databases to state and local election officials to identify unqualified voters and that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the ‘DOGE Administrator’ shall review federal immigration databases alongside state voter registration lists and other state records.
“Section 2(c) requires the Secretary of DHS to provide to the Attorney General and state officials ‘complete information on all foreign nationals who have indicated on any immigration form that they have registered or voted in a Federal, State, or local election.’ Section 2(d) requires that federal voter registration agencies ‘shall assess citizenship’ of individuals who receive public assistance prior to providing them voter registration forms.
“The EO also states that ‘counting ballots received after Election Day’ is a violation of federal law establishing a uniform Election Day. In accordance with this interpretation, Section 7(a) of the EO provides that the Attorney General ‘shall take all necessary action to enforce’ 2 U.S.C. § 7 and 3 U.S.C. § 1 ‘against States’ that do not adopt an interpretation that mail-in ballots must be received, rather than sent, by Election Day to be counted.
“Other provisions of the EO include a requirement for the Secretary of Defense to update the Federal Post Card Application for military and overseas voters to include documentary proof of citizenship, an instruction to the EAC to amend the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines and rescind prior certifications of voting systems, and requirements for the Attorney General to enter into voter information-sharing agreements with state election officials.
“Several provisions of the EO purport to punish states that do not comply with its mandates. For example, Section 4 prohibits the EAC from providing federal funds to states that do not comply with new voting systems standards, and Section 5 orders the Attorney General to prioritize enforcement of federal election integrity laws in and review withholding grants from states that do not enter into information-sharing agreements or refuse to cooperate with federal law enforcement.
“Similarly, Section 7(b) states that the EAC shall withhold certain federal grants from states that do not comply with the interpretation that mail-in ballots must be received by Election Day to be counted.”
