By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A federal judge has ruled against President Trump’s request to add a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to the federal voter registration form. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly determined the directive was an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers, siding with Democratic and civil rights groups. The ruling prevents the U.S. Election Assistance Commission from adding the requirement, which has been attempted by Republicans but faced legal challenges. The lawsuit will continue to address other aspects of Trump’s executive order, including the requirement that all mailed ballots be received by Election Day.
Read the original article here
Federal judge rules Trump can’t require citizenship proof on the federal voting form, and this whole situation really highlights a fundamental misunderstanding, or perhaps a purposeful ignorance, of how voting actually works in this country. The ruling itself is a straightforward acknowledgment of existing federal law, specifically the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. This act, passed by Congress, explicitly states that you don’t need to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote. It’s the law of the land, plain and simple.
The insistence on requiring proof of citizenship, especially on a federal voting form, seems particularly odd when you consider that, in most states, there are already multiple layers of documentation required to even get to the point of registering to vote. The states, not the federal government, are responsible for managing the details of elections, including the requirements for voter registration. The federal government’s role is more about ensuring access and protecting voting rights, not dictating specific methods of proof. The very idea that non-citizens would risk serious penalties, like deportation, to vote is statistically absurd.
What makes this ruling so significant is its connection to the ongoing battle over election integrity and voting rights. Trump’s attempt to require citizenship proof on the federal form was seen by many as a deliberate attempt to suppress voter turnout, particularly among groups that traditionally lean Democratic. This is especially true because most states already have mechanisms in place to verify citizenship during the registration process. There’s a lot of talk about voter fraud, and the claim is typically that widespread voter fraud by non-citizens is a serious problem. But the facts just don’t support that. The evidence of non-citizens voting is extremely rare.
The focus on this issue also highlights a deeper tension in American politics, one between state and federal power. The U.S. Constitution gives states the primary responsibility for running elections. Federal law sets some overarching rules, like the National Voter Registration Act, but states have a lot of leeway in how they implement those rules. Trump’s executive order was seen by many as overstepping the bounds of the federal government’s authority, encroaching on a domain that constitutionally belongs to the states.
This isn’t about protecting democracy; it is about taking control of the process from the voter. This ruling also touches on a larger trend of making it harder for legal US citizens to vote. Voter ID laws, limitations on mail-in ballots, and other measures are often presented as ways to prevent voter fraud, but they frequently end up disproportionately affecting groups that have historically faced challenges to their voting rights. The underlying goal, whether explicit or implicit, is often about winning elections, not protecting the integrity of the process.
The timing of this ruling is also worth noting. It comes amidst a highly polarized political environment and ongoing debates about election security, voter access, and the role of the federal government in overseeing elections. The fact is, if you’re a registered voter, you’ve already proven you’re a citizen. The efforts being made to “protect” an election are really a way of controlling a successful vote away from the voter and placing it in an unaccountable system. The idea that there is widespread voter fraud at the federal level by non-citizens is just not supported by the data.
The legal arguments in this case will continue to evolve, especially considering the fact that the lawsuit, brought forth by the DNC and civil rights groups, allows the judge to consider additional challenges to Trump’s order. It all seems to boil down to this: states run elections, and the federal government’s role is to ensure fair access and protect the right to vote.