A group of advocacy organizations filed a case on Monday, challenging Donald Trump’s recent execution order, who wants to revise the US election system, accusing the president of trying to take “illegal action” to apply “lawless mandates”.
The court case claims that Trump’s unilateral efforts to reshape a federal election voting-an influential requirement for evidence of citizenship in registration and restriction of the vote on the mail-moves his powers as a president and threatens to undress millions of their right to vote.
“The order violates and undermines the division of powers through an iniquity from the president’s powers to declare the rules of election of executive fiat,” the trial said. “The order is an attack on the constitutionally authorized inspections and balances that support the US elections free and fair.”
The Judicial Procedure – filed in the Federal Court of DC by the Campaign Legislation Center and the State Defenders Fund on behalf of the United Latin American citizens League, the initiative to provide families and the Association of Students in Arizona – asks the Administration of the Administration of the Order They issued.
He names a number of defendants, including the President’s Executive Service, Prosecutor General Pam Bondi and the Ministry of Justice, Defense Minister Pete Heget and the Ministry of Defense, as well as the US election support Commission, an independent government commissioner focused on the election administration.
Trump’s executive order, signed last week, claims that the United States is “failing to apply basic and necessary election protection.” The order instructs the Ministry of Justice to pursue crimes in the countries that the administration considers that they do not meet federal law, requires the Ministry of Internal Security to work with the ELON of the Government Efficiency of the Elon Musk to review the registration of state voters and direct the election assistance to the Fede of Fede non -de -foreclosure “census standards.
“According to the Constitution, government governments must defend the US elections in accordance with federal laws that protect the rights of voting for Americans and protect against dilution through illegal voting, discrimination, fraud and other forms of abuse and mistakes,” the order said.
President Donald Trump spoke with the press aboard the Air Force One before arriving at Palm Beach International Airport in West Palm Beach, Florida, March 28, 2025.
Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images
Moreover, the enforcement order calls for evidence of citizenship throughout the country by the form used in registration for voting – change from these elections laws and experts on the right to vote, have taken a problem. The documents that can be used for evidence, according to the order, include a passport, a real ID card, a military identity card or a valid federal or state identifier.
However, the case states that the order does not accept identification documents issued by tribal governments or birth certificates as forms of evidence. The claim also raises questions about approved methods, arguing that only half of the Americans have a passport and the “most” true identification numbers do not show citizenship.
Nevertheless, the trial implies the order of the order to the Commission to support the election for the change of the form to add the proof of a requirement for citizenship, may violate the 1993 voter registration law, which, according to the judicial process, gives the “exclusive body” to administer the form.
“In accordance with NVRA’s intention to create a simple and easy -to -complete registration form, NVRA states that the federal form may not” include a requirement for notarization or other formal certification, “the court case said.
Trump’s order suggests that the non -iconic can easily vote in federal elections, but experts have called an unkitted vote of a “disappearing rare phenomenon”, which is easily pursued. According to a survey of over 23 million votes filed in the 2016 election, employees identify only 30 suspects with voting for uncistic, only 0.0001% of the total votes filed.
Separately, the enforcement order also strives for a vote by post, making the federal funding conditionally to the countries determining the deadline for receipt of ballots until the day of the election. Trump-who was accused of numerous federal crimes of his efforts to cancel the 2020 election in cases that he had dropped after he was elected repeatedly suggests that the newsletters have led to an increase in voting fraud.
The lawsuit claims that the male news provision is illegal, arguing that “states have broad freedom and flexibility” to determine the time, place and manner of federal elections in elections and voters in the constitution.
“Congress may adopt election laws if he chooses, but there is no conflict with the federal law, states have the power to establish and obey their own election laws,” the lawsuit said.
According to the case, seventeen states, plus Washington, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands of the United States, have laws that allow the newsletters to be counted as long as they are sent by mail of the day and received on a certain period after.
“Many of these countries have had such deadlines for receiving many years, and Congress declined to adopt any laws dictating the deadlines for receiving a vote,” the court said.
The trial notes that the Congress has long established that the Federal Election Day was the first Tuesday in November, in addition to establishing the date of appointment of presidential voters, but “left more regulation in this area to the countries.” The lawsuit states that the US Supreme Court said that while the votes should be placed on the day of the election, some aspects of the election process, such as a table of all votes, will naturally take place after the election day. “
“The Prosecutor General does not have the authority to” apply “the status of the Federal Election Day and the president cannot order her to do so. Nor does a state “violate” these statutes when it counts valid to submit ballots sent on election day, which are received after the election day, if the state legislation admits, “the lawsuit said.
The trial also suggests that the executive order can make it difficult for citizens abroad and those who serve in the military to vote. The enforcement order, signed by Trump, directed the Minister of Defense to update the form used by these groups to register and request a lack of vote – called “Federal Mailing Card Request” – to include a documentary requirement for a citizenship.
The lawsuit notes that this form is required by law as part of the Law on Voting in Uniforms and Outraitting Citizens, adopted in 1986 to “protect the voice rights of Americans serving in military, their families and other US citizens living abroad.” The claim claims that the changes required by the order will be “impossible given the form required by Congress”.
“Neither the President nor the Minister of Defense have legal powers to ignore UOCAVA’s legal requirement to provide such a card to military and overseas voters,” the court said.
Together, these provisions would have a “significant impact” on voting rights, a lawsuit for a court case.
Lulac members – Spanish and Latin American Civil Rights Organization – for example, will be injured if some of its members “have the right to vote, often do not have the necessary documents for citizenship”. The court case is indicated. The organization expects the effort to register voters, “will fall”.
The Association of Students in Arizona will similarly be damaged by the proof of the requirement for citizenship, the lawsuit said, although it is required when voters register in the form of the state there.
“Even those members who are able to register are facing upcoming harm. Some members will be able to obtain or have access to DPOC only by spending considerable time, money and/or efforts and will face more difficulties in registration due to the DPOC requirement,” the lawsuit said.
ABC News Michel Stodart has contributed to this report.
