Federal Appeals Court Upholds Block on Trump Voter List Order

A federal appeals court has dealt a blow to the Trump administration’s voting restrictions just months before nationwide midterm elections. Judges on the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a federal ruling that blocks the executive order across nearly half of all states.

The 1st Circuit Court Ruling and the 23 States Involved

The appellate panel issued a 2-1 decision rejecting the administration’s appeal to lift a lower-court injunction secured by Democratic-led states, including California, Massachusetts, and Washington. District Court in Boston by Democratic officials representing 23 states and the District of Columbia. They argued that the executive order was unconstitutional because individual states and Congress hold the authority to set election rules, not the president.

Department of Justice argued that the challenge was premature because government agencies had not yet finalized their implementation actions. The appeals court firmly rejected that reasoning.

“As the district court reasoned, the (executive order) lays out a clear set of rapidly approaching deadlines by which states must coordinate with federal officials and comply with new voting procedures — all while the states must also ensure that their officials and the public understand the evolving set of rules that would govern the upcoming September and November elections.”

Appeals court judges, 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

Details of the Blocked Executive Order

Citizenship and Immigration Services and the commissioner of the Social Security Administration to establish a state citizenship list of eligible voters. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots exclusively to individuals appearing on that list.

Malaysian Court of Appeal Denies Citizenship to Children Born Out of Wedlock

When signing the directive in the Oval Office, the president defended the proposed changes as necessary safeguards against non-U.S. citizens voting, stating, The cheating on mail-in voting is legendary.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, previously halted the order from taking effect for the November 3 elections within the suing states. Judge Talwani ruled that the president lacked the statutory authority to direct the Department of Homeland Security to compile the citizenship data or to order the Postal Service to restrict mail-in ballot delivery. She also noted that the administration had no power to intimidate local election officials to use the necessarily incomplete confirmed citizenship lists as a resource, lest they face criminal prosecution.

The Ongoing Legal Battle Over the SAVE System

Last year, the Department of Homeland Security integrated bulk-check capabilities and linked the database with Social Security Administration records, adding records for American-born citizens.

According to figures released in April by then-USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser, more than 60 million voter records had been run through the revamped system, with 21,000 flagged as potential noncitizens. However, separate federal rulings have scrutinized these data tools. U.S. District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan ruled that the revamped SAVE data tool is unlawful in its current form, finding that federal agencies exceeded their statutory authority and violated the Privacy, Social Security, and Administrative Procedure acts.

Next Legal Steps and Supreme Court Prospects

Conversely, voting rights advocates welcomed the appellate decision.