Judge blocks Trump election order creating federal voter list, mail ballot restrictions

A federal judge in Massachusetts on June 25 struck down key portions of President Donald Trump's executive order seeking to create a federal voter eligibility database and impose new restrictions on the mailing of absentee ballots.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled that the order exceeded the Trump administration’s constitutional authority over elections. The decision granted a summary judgment to 23 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia, declaring Sections 2, 3, and 5 of Executive Order 14399 unconstitutional and permanently barring federal agencies from implementing those provisions for the 2026 midterm elections.

"The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections," Talwani wrote, concluding that the executive order violated the separation of powers by attempting to assume authority the Constitution assigns to Congress and the states. She added that the president "plays no direct role" in administering federal elections and "is not to be a lawmaker."

The ruling marks the most significant judicial setback yet for Trump's March 31 executive order, which was intended to strengthen election integrity by verifying voters’ citizenship, preventing noncitizens from voting and reducing opportunities for mail ballot fraud. 

The order directed the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to compile state-by-state lists of citizens eligible to vote in federal elections. The order also instructed the U.S. Postal Service to develop rules preventing the mailing of absentee ballots to voters who were not included on federally approved lists.

>> USPS chief plans to withhold ballot delivery from states that defy Trump election order << 

The lawsuit was brought by California and 22 other Democratic-led states, along with the District of Columbia and Pennsylvania Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro. The states argued that the Constitution leaves election administration primarily to the states, subject to laws enacted by Congress, and that Trump lacked authority to create new federal election requirements through executive action.

Talwani agreed, writing that the Constitution gives states primary responsibility for setting voter qualifications and administering elections, while granting Congress — not the president — authority to establish nationwide election rules.

The injunction’s application is limited to the implementation of the executive order for the Nov. 3, 2026, general election and earlier elections, while the court dismissed without prejudice claims relating to elections after the 2026 midterms as not yet ripe.