Atlanta (AP) – Federal Judge Friday blocked President Donald Trump’s experience to revise the US election, aside with a group of general state -owned lawyers of Democrats who dispute efforts as unconstitutional.
On March 25, the executive order of the Republican President seeks to force employees to require documentary evidence of citizenship for all who register to vote for federal elections, to accept only sent ballots received from the day of election and the condition that the federal funding for the election of financing.
General attorneys said the Directive “usurped the constitutional power of the states and seeks to amend an election law from FIAT”. The White House defended the order as “standing up free, honest and honest elections” and called proof of the citizenship “strength” requirement.
Judge Denise J. Casper of the US District Court in Massachusetts said in the order on Friday that states are likely to be successful in terms of their legal challenges.
“The Constitution does not grant the President any specific election powers,” Casper wrote.
Casper also noted that as far as citizenship is concerned, “there is no dispute (neither there may be) that US citizenship is required to vote in federal elections, and federal voter registration forms require citizenship certification.”
Casper cites arguments made by countries that the requirements will “load countries with considerable effort and significant costs” to update the procedures.
The decision is the second legal failure for the Trump selection order. Federal Judge in Washington, Colombia County, previously blocked parts of the Directive, including the requirement for evidence of citizenship for the Federal Voter Registration Form.
The order is the culmination of Trump’s long -standing complaints about elections. After his first victory in 2016, Trump falsely claims that his overall vote would be much higher if he was not “millions of people who voted illegally.” Since 2020, Trump has made false allegations of widespread fraud with voters and manipulating voting machines to explain his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.
He said his executive order provides election against illegal voting by non -heeled, although numerous studies and investigations in the United States show that this is rare and usually a mistake. The casting of voting as uncistic is already against the law and can lead to fines and deportation if convicted.
The order will also require states to exclude all postal newsletters or absent from election day and puts federal funding at the federal funding if election employees do not comply. Currently, 18 states and Puerto Rico are accepting sent postal newsletters after election day, while they are placed by placing postage stamps on or before that date, according to the National Conference of State Laws.
Oregon and Washington, who conduct their election almost entirely in the mail, have filed a separate case for the voting deadline, stating that the executive order may disregard the voters in their countries. When the case was brought, the Secretary of State of Washington Steve Hobbs noted that more than 300,000 ballots in the state had arrived after the 2024 election day.
Trump’s order has been praised by the best election employees in some Republican countries who say that this may impede cases of voter fraud and will give them access to federal data to maintain their polling rollers better. But many legal experts say the order exceeds Trump’s power, since the Constitution gives countries the power to determine “times, places and election”, with Congress authorized to set rules for elections of the Federal Service. As the decision says on Friday, the Constitution does not envisage the presidents to set election rules.
During the hearing earlier this month, at the request of the countries for preliminary disposal, the lawyers of the countries and the lawyers for the administration argued about the consequences of the Trump order, whether the changes could be made on time for the intermediate elections next year and how much the countries would cost.
The lawyer of the Ministry of Justice Bridget O’Hiki said during the hearing that the order seeks to provide a set of rules for certain aspects of election operations, not to have a patchwork to state laws and that any harm to states is speculation.
O’Hichey also claims that the newsletters sent after elected day may be manipulated in some way, suggesting that people can extract their ballots and change their votes based on what they see in early results. But all the ballots received after the election day require a postage stamp showing that they have been sent to or before that date, and that any postage stamp vote will not count after election day.