Election integrity has been a cornerstone of President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign strategy. Shortly after taking office in March 2025, President Trump took decisive action by signing an executive order aimed at bolstering the security of American elections. This order prominently featured a requirement for voters to furnish proof of citizenship, thereby confirming their eligibility to participate in federal elections before they could vote.

While this requirement might seem reasonable to many, it has sparked considerable controversy, particularly among Democrats who have voiced strong objections.

Recently, a U.S. District judge has struck down this specific provision of President Trump’s order. The ruling has reignited a debate over the boundaries of federal and state powers concerning election processes.

The Constitution, in Article I, Section 4, delineates the framework for elections, setting forth responsibilities but notably omits any direct mention of the Executive Branch’s authority over elections, as described in Article II. This omission has become a focal point in the ongoing discussions about the appropriate scope of executive power in election governance.

Donald Trump’s request to add a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to the federal voter registration form cannot be enforced, a federal judge ruled on Friday.

US district judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington DC, sided with Democratic and civil rights groups that sued the Trump administration over his executive order to overhaul US elections.

She ruled that the proof-of-citizenship directive was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers, dealing a blow to the administration and its allies who have argued that such a mandate is necessary to restore public confidence that only Americans are voting in US elections.

“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the States and to Congress, this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her opinion.

The Constitution, in Article I, Section 4, states:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

There is no mention of responsibility or authority in Article II, describing the Executive Branch, over elections. 

The ruling prohibits the US Election Assistance Commission from carrying out this portion of the EO:

The ruling grants the plaintiffs a partial summary judgment that prohibits the proof-of-citizenship requirement from going into effect. It says the US Election Assistance Commission, which has been considering adding the requirement to the federal voter form, is permanently barred from taking action to do so.

As of this writing, the White House has not responded to this ruling, although it’s a safe bet President Trump will have something to say about it in time.