Trump Signs Executive Order Mandating Proof of Citizenship for Voter Registration, Sparking Legal Firestorm
In a bold move that has ignited a political firestorm, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday imposing stricter controls on federal elections.
The new mandate requires voters to present proof of citizenship such as a passport when registering to vote. This directive comes amid Trump’s ongoing claims that the election system remains fundamentally flawed, with a particular focus on absentee voting, which he insists played a major role in his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden.
“This country is so sick because of the election, the fake elections,” Trump declared while signing the order at the White House. “We’re going to straighten it out, one way or the other,” he added, underscoring his belief that the electoral system is biased against him. Despite the controversy surrounding his repeated baseless assertions of widespread election fraud, Trump doubled down on his call for reform.
The executive order mandates that states require documentation to prove citizenship during voter registration, with noncompliance leading to potential cuts in federal election funding.
Furthermore, the attorney general will now have the authority to take action against states that include absentee or mail-in ballots received after Election Day in their final vote tally—a practice currently allowed in several states as long as ballots are postmarked by Election Day.
Legal experts have sharply criticized the executive order, warning that it could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. Richard Hasen, a law professor at UCLA, called the move “dangerous” and an overreach of presidential power, pointing out that states traditionally manage their own elections and that any federal attempt to impose uniform voting rules risks undermining local control. “This is an executive power grab,” Hasen wrote on his Election Law blog.
The Brennan Center for Justice, a prominent nonprofit organization focused on voting rights, slammed the executive order as an overstep, stating it could block tens of millions of eligible voters. The group also emphasized that U.S. presidents do not have the constitutional authority to enact such sweeping election changes unilaterally.
Civil liberties organizations, including the ACLU, have expressed outrage, calling the order “an extreme abuse of power.” They have vowed to challenge the directive in court, with the ACLU stating unequivocally, “We’ll see him in court.” The debate surrounding the order has already sparked intense legal and public scrutiny, as it raises fundamental questions about voting rights, federal authority, and the integrity of the election process.
While voting in U.S. federal elections by non-citizens has been illegal for decades punishable by fines, imprisonment, and even deportation experts argue that this new order could create significant barriers to voting, particularly for marginalized communities. The ramifications of this executive decision are likely to be felt across the nation in the coming months, as legal battles unfold and states grapple with the challenge of complying with the new rules.
As this high-stakes battle over election laws heats up, all eyes will be on the courts to determine whether Trump’s directive can withstand the mounting legal challenges or whether it will ultimately be blocked as an unconstitutional overreach.
