A federal judge has blocked a key executive order. This order aimed to change U.S. election rules. U.S. District Judge John H. Chun issued the ruling. He sided with Oregon and Washington. The decision halted major parts of the Trump administration’s directive. This is significant news for election administration.
Trump’s Election Order Explained
President Trump issued an executive order in March 2025. It was titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.” The order introduced strict new requirements. It sought to require voters to prove U.S. citizenship. This proof was needed to register for federal elections. It also demanded that all mail-in ballots be received by Election Day. Furthermore, the order threatened to withhold federal funding. States would lose money if they did not comply. Many experts and voting rights advocates predicted legal challenges. They noted the Constitution grants election authority to states and Congress. The order seemed to bypass congressional approval.
Oregon and Washington Sue
Oregon and Washington filed a lawsuit. They argued the order would harm their election systems. Both states conduct elections entirely by mail. They accept ballots postmarked by Election Day. The Trump order would have changed this. It could have disenfranchised thousands of voters. In the 2024 election, Washington counted nearly 120,000 such ballots. Oregon received almost 14,000. State officials called the order illegal. They stated it was a direct assault on the Constitution. It also threatened their ability to run secure elections. The states sued separately. They argued they faced unique harms as vote-by-mail states. Their lawsuit sought to declare the order unconstitutional.
Judge Chun’s Decision
Judge John H. Chun ruled against the Trump administration. He found the president lacked the authority. He could not unilaterally impose these new rules. The judge stated the order violated the separation of powers. The U.S. Constitution grants election regulation authority to Congress and the states. It does not give this power to the president. Judge Chun is a Biden appointee. His ruling was detailed in a 75-page order. He specifically addressed the proof of citizenship requirement. He also addressed the mail-in ballot deadline. The court found that these requirements exceeded presidential authority.
Key Provisions Blocked
The judge permanently blocked key sections. This included requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register. It also blocked the demand for all ballots to be received by Election Day. The order also attempted to tie federal election funding to compliance. The court rejected this attempt. It stated the president cannot unilaterally impose new conditions. He also cannot thwart congressional will by canceling appropriations. The injunction specifically applies to Washington and Oregon. However, the reasoning has broader implications.
Broader Context and Similar Rulings
This ruling is not an isolated event. It follows similar decisions in other cases. A Massachusetts case brought by 19 other states had similar outcomes. A lawsuit in Washington, D.C., by Democratic groups also saw relief. Judges have repeatedly questioned Trump’s efforts. They cite a lack of evidence for widespread voter fraud claims. The order bypassed established legislative processes. It sought to reshape state election administration. This move was characterized by some as a federal takeover.
Implications and Reactions
State officials in Oregon and Washington celebrated the ruling. Washington Attorney General Nick Brown called it a “huge victory.” He stated the court enforced the rule that only states and Congress can regulate elections. Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read echoed this sentiment. He said it was a “win for the Constitution.” He added that presidents do not get to rig elections. The decision protects their existing voting laws. It ensures voters can cast their ballots without fear. This outcome is a significant win for voters in Oregon. It is also a win for the rule of law. It reaffirms the division of powers in U.S. governance. The news provides clarity for election officials.
Future Outlook
The ruling largely halts the challenged provisions. It means Oregon and Washington can maintain their current election laws. These include counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day. It also means voters will not need to provide new documentary proof of citizenship for federal registration. The decision reflects a broader legal trend. Courts have generally found presidential overreach in election matters. This news highlights the ongoing legal battles over election integrity and presidential authority.
