Could Millions of Americans Lose Their Right to Vote?
A Bold Move in Election Law
In a move that could dramatically change how Americans cast their votes, former President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday that would mandate checks of citizenship status as part of voter registration for federal elections.
That sweeping action, which included deadlines being changed for mail-in ballots and election equipment, is likely to face legal challenges and has raised alarms about disenfranchising voters.
The executive order tasks the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) with overhauling voter registration forms, requiring documents like U.S. passports or certain government-issued IDs to show proof of citizenship.
But election experts say this move could create more barriers to participation in elections for millions of eligible voters.
Could Millions Be Disenfranchised?
Currently, federal law mandates that when voters register, they swear under penalty of perjury that they’re citizens. Courts have also previously prohibited states from enforcing documentary proof-of-citizenship requirements with respect to federal races. Critics say Trump’s order sidestepped these rulings and risks taking away voting rights from citizens who don’t have adequate documentation.
Only about half of Americans have valid passports, according to the U.S. State Department. Birth certificates — often used to establish citizenship are, moreover, not specified acceptable evidence under the new order. Real ID and military identification cards do not necessarily prove citizenship.
Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, said: “A whole lot of this is illegal.”
Election law specialists predict that the order will face swift legal opposition. Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the Voting Rights Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law, stated: “A whole lot of this is illegal.”
The Legal Battle Ahead
One of the key questions hanging over the order is whether the president has the power to impose such far-reaching changes. Experts say Trump’s command usurps presidential authority, since the U.S. Constitution gives the power to regulate elections to Congress and to states — not to the president.
“The president has nearly no power over federal elections — by design,” observed Justin Levitt, a constitutional law scholar at Loyola Law School. The order is likely to prompt lawsuits challenging its legality, as civil rights groups, voting rights advocates and a handful of state officials prepare to contest the directive in court.
The Bigger Picture: Election Integrity vs. Voter Suppression
Trump has long claimed, without evidence, that noncitizens vote in significant numbers, and he has made election integrity a signature issue in his political messaging. However, studies and election audits have repeatedly found no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Voting when you’re a noncitizen is already a felony, and election officials keep an eye out for it.
The executive order’s reach goes well beyond verifying citizenship. It also prohibits election machines using QR codes, requiring states to replace when it comes to expensive voting hardware. The order also mandates that all ballots be received on or before Election Day, preempting states that allow ballots postmarked on or before Election Day to be counted later.
The shift could prove especially disruptive to absentee voters, among them military personnel serving outside their home states, seniors and people who can’t vote in person due to disabilities or work schedules. Many states allow for late-arriving ballots as long as they are postmarked before or on Election Day, meaning that a rollback of this policy would lead to the rejection of thousands of legitimate votes.
Congressional Action and the SAVE Act
The executive order echoes a Republican-backed measure in Congress known as the SAVE Act that would require documentary proof of citizenship to vote. Unlike Trump’s order, the bill allows for a birth certificate as an acceptable ID.
But election officials say that even with this inclusion, the law could continue to disenfranchise eligible voters who do not have easy access to their documents. Voting rights advocates say such measures are especially burdensome for people in minority communities, those who live in rural areas and senior citizens.
Many people, especially those born before the digital era of record-keeping, may not have their birth certificates or other citizenship documents at hand. Replacing them can be expensive and time-consuming and sometimes involve navigating bureaucratic hurdles.
A Costly and Logistical Challenge for States
Beyond the legal ramifications, Trump’s executive order raises real logistical and financial concerns for state election officials. For states to comply with requirements for new documentation of voter registration, the prohibition of certain voting machines and changes to mail-in ballot rules, states would have to completely change their current system of elections — possibly at great cost to taxpayers.
Election security experts also warn that swapping out election equipment too close to an election cycle could create confusion, longer wait times at polling places and a greater chance for mistakes. Many states have invested years in adjusting systems for voting, and sweeping changes could have unintended effects capable of undermining the public’s confidence in elections.
What Happens Next?
Legal battles are inevitable. Opponents argue that the order unfairly targets marginalized communities, the elderly, and lower-income individuals—many of whom may struggle to obtain the required documentation. Meanwhile, supporters claim it is a necessary step to protect election integrity.
With lawsuits likely to delay the order’s implementation, the fate of Trump’s directive may ultimately be decided by the courts. If struck down, the ruling could reinforce long-standing federal election laws that prioritize voter access. If upheld, it could significantly alter how Americans register and vote in future elections.
The Political Fallout and 2024 Election Implications
Trump’s maneuver is widely regarded as a strategic gesture to energize his base before the next presidential election. Election security and concerns about voter fraud have been significant talking points in his political rhetoric, and this executive order reinforces those narratives.
Civil rights groups and Democrats have pledged to challenge the order in court and in the states, and some states are already pursuing measures of their own to protect access to voters. It helps cement what Republicans who favor tighter voting laws see as a step toward preventing what they argue are weaknesses in the electoral system.
As court challenges play out, the executive order is sure to become a major issue in upcoming elections, and a source of heated debate over the balance between access to voting and ensuring that elections are not marred by fraud. Whether it withstands legal scrutiny or not
