In a recent development, a federal judge has intervened to block President Donald Trump’s attempt to revamp U.S. elections, supporting a group of Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the initiative on constitutional grounds. Trump’s executive order from March 25 aimed to mandate proof of citizenship for voter registration in federal elections, restrict the acceptance of mailed ballots to those received by Election Day, and tie federal election grant funding to compliance with the new ballot deadline.

The attorneys general contended that the directive infringed upon states’ constitutional authority and attempted to unilaterally amend election laws. Judge Denise J. Casper of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts concurred with the states, emphasizing that the President lacks specific powers over elections as per the Constitution. Casper highlighted the existing requirement of U.S. citizenship for voting in federal elections and the attestation of citizenship on federal voter registration forms.

Furthermore, the ruling also addresses the significant burdens and costs that would fall on states to update procedures as per the order. This legal setback marks the second instance where a court has restrained aspects of Trump’s election order, with a prior ruling in Washington, D.C., blocking the proof-of-citizenship requirement on federal voter registration forms.

The ruling underscores the foundational importance of free and fair elections in the U.S., with New York Attorney General Letitia James emphasizing the unconstitutionality of Trump’s actions. Trump’s ongoing claims of election fraud and his executive order’s objectives to prevent illegal voting face scrutiny and legal challenges, underscoring the complexities and implications of election law and presidential authority in the U.S.