Judge blocks Trump’s executive order regarding voting
A federal judge blocked Donald Trump’s attempt to request evidence of citizenship on the voter registration form.
FOX -LA
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump is ahead of his efforts to change election rules despite the initial court ruling that he has no authority to do so.
Trump said on August 30 he would sign an executive order requiring voters to provide identification in all elections.
The executive order signed by Trump in March required that he present evidence of U.S. citizenship issued by the government to register to vote in federal elections.
“The Constitution does not grant a certain authority to a president, regardless of election,” wrote Dennis Casper, a US district judge in Massachusetts, in June.
In April, a federal judge in Washington, D.C. came to the same conclusion.
This is what you need to know.
What does Trump want to do?
In a Truth Social post, Trump said: “Voter IDs must be part of all votes. There are no exceptions!
He did not say what kind of identification he wanted, when he would sign an order, or why he had the authority to impose rules.
What kind of voter identification is needed now?
According to the National Congress of the State Legislature, 36 states require that you show some form of ID on the ballot. In some states, the identification is a photo ID, such as a driver’s license, or a non-photo ID, such as a bank statement.
According to the NCSL, in most cases, there is no need to check voter identity differently, most often by comparing voter signatures to files.
What are the pros and cons of voter ID?
It argues that the requirement for a voter ID to support prevents people from voting for someone else’s name and increases public confidence in the election.
Opponents say the type of fraud that aims to prevent rules from occurring rarely is an unnecessary burden for voters.
What did the Supreme Court say about voter ID?
The Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s photo ID requirement for voters in 2008.
“In short, based on the records produced in this case, we cannot conclude that the law imposes “overly burdensome requirements” on a class of voters,” Judge John Paul Stevens wrote for a 6-3 majority.
Indiana did not provide evidence of fraud, but the challenger had not produced witnesses in trials that claimed it was unable to meet the requirements of the law.
After he retired, Stevens described it as a “pretty unfortunate decision” in a 2016 interview, but it was necessary because he had to stick to the evidence on the record.
What did the court say about Trump’s voter registration requirements?
Trump’s civil proof order on voter registration was immediately challenged in court.
In April, Washington US District Judge Judge Colleen Coller Cotery sided with the Women Voters Education Fund, the Unified Latin American Citizens Federation, the Democratic National Committee and other challengers.
Kollar-Kotelly has denied Trump’s orders moving forward as the case is suing, and it is likely that the president has surpassed his authority.
“Our constitution entrusts the president with legislatures and states that have the power to regulate federal elections,” she wrote.
In June, Casper – a federal judge in Massachusetts – was governed in another lawsuit filed by 19 states.
Casper said Trump’s attempt to prevent the state from counting citizenship requirements for registration and mail-in ballots received after Election Day was likely to disenfranchise eligible voters.
What does the Constitution say?
The so-called election clause in the constitution states that “the era, place and method for elections for senators and representatives will be stipulated by the legislature in each state.”
The clause also states that Congress can “enact or modify such regulations.”
What happens next?
Trump’s executive order is expected to challenge him in court once he signs it.
What’s the bigger picture?
Trump has long questioned the US election system and has continued to falsely argue that his 2020 defeat to Democratic President Joe Biden was the result of widespread fraud. The president and his Republican allies have also made unfounded claims about widespread votes by non-citizens. It is illegal and rarely happens.
Contributed by: Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy
