Reagan-Appointed Judge Blocks Key Part of Trump's Election Overhaul Order
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
A federal judge on Thursday blocked major components of President Donald Trump's sweeping executive order seeking to overhaul U.S. election procedures, ruling that his administration likely overstepped constitutional boundaries.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, appointed by GOP icon former President Ronald Reagan and elevated under former President Bill Clinton, issued a preliminary injunction halting provisions of the March executive order that would have added a proof-of-citizenship requirement to the National Mail Voter Registration Form.
The judge also froze efforts to require public assistance applicants to verify citizenship before accessing federal voter registration materials.
Why It Matters
Trump's order, signed on March 25, tasked the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) with implementing changes that, critics argued, would disenfranchise millions of voters.
Voting rights organizations and Democratic groups immediately filed suit, arguing that the directive violated the Constitution's Elections Clause, which grants states—not the federal executive—the authority to regulate elections.
What To Know
The decision represents a fresh setback for Trump, who has argued that the requirement is necessary to restore public confidence in elections.
In a 120-page ruling, the judge stated that the plaintiffs had demonstrated the proof-of-citizenship requirement would inflict irreparable harm on their clients and run counter to the public interest. Meanwhile, the government offered "almost no defense of the President's order on the merits."
"The President is free to express his views on the policies he believes should be considered," Kollar-Kotelly wrote. "But here, he has issued an 'Order' directing an independent commission to 'require' changes in areas tightly regulated by Congress."
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office at the White House on April 24 in Washington, D.C.
President Donald Trump speaks to reporters in the Oval Office at the White House on April 24 in Washington, D.C.
Photo byThe judge also struck down a portion of Trump's executive order that would have required public assistance recipients to verify their citizenship before accessing the federal voter registration form.
The plaintiffs in the case included the League of Women Voters, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the Democratic National Committee.
Trump's administration argued that no harm had occurred because the provisions had not been enforced. During an April 17 court hearing, Trump attorney Michael Gates said a preliminary injunction wasn't warranted because the order hadn't been implemented, according to the Associated Press (AP).
The Justice Department's Civil Rights Division expressed disappointment with the ruling. "Few things are more sacred to a free society—or more essential to democracy—than the protection of its election systems," said Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights.
But the judge allowed other aspects of Trump's sweeping executive order on elections to proceed for now, including a directive to tighten mail-in ballot deadlines nationwide.
She also declined to block Trump's directive opening certain databases to Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency, which seeks to examine state voter rolls for noncitizens. The judge said the Democrats' objections were either premature or better suited for state-level litigation.
What People Are Saying
Roman Palomares, national president of LULAC, told the AP: "Our democracy depends on all voters feeling confident that they can vote freely and that their vote will be counted accurately."
What Happens Next
Trump has long spoken out on his worries and grievances about voter fraud, most notably after he lost the 2020 election to former President Joe Biden, when he repeatedly claimed the Democrats stole it. Trump's legal team is likely to challenge the injunction in appellate court. If the appeals court rules differently, the blocked provisions could be temporarily reinstated.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Petition to make city attorney an elected position fails in Grover Beach
A petition to make the role of city attorney an elected position in Grover Beach came up short on Wednesday when the petitioners failed to submit any signatures by the deadline. In August, citizens grassroots group GroverH2O filed a notice of intent to circulate a petition to make the role of city attorney elected, with a 180-day window to collect enough valid signatures by June 4 kicking off on Dec. 7. The petition sought to put the issue of an elected city attorney on the November 2026 ballot, and would have required valid signatures from 10% of the city's registered voters — or a minimum of 811 people — by the June 4 deadline. But as of Wednesday, the city had not received any signature submissions from the proponents, bringing the issue to a close for the time being, according to city manager Matt Bronson. The Tribune reached out to GroverH2O for comment but did not receive a reply as of Friday afternoon. In the past year, GroverH2O has succeeded in gathering enough signatures to get an initiative asking voters if the role of city clerk should be elected rather than appointed, with the issue set to appear on the November 2026 ballot. Grover H2O was also successful in raising enough signatures to get a recall campaign on the November 2024 ballot against District 2 Councilmember Dan Rushing for his vote to raise water and wastewater rates to pay for Grover Beach's share of the now-defunct Central Coast Blue water recycling project. During the recall petition process, city clerk Wendi Sims initially denied Grover H2O's recall petition, contesting the factual accuracy of several of the group's stated reasons to start the petition. The dispute over the recall petition's content led to Grover H2O's lawsuit against the city, which was represented by Lozano Smith attorney Robert Lomeli. In April, attorney Stew Jenkins, speaking on behalf of Grover H2O, said that the efforts to make both the city attorney and city clerk elected are a response to the city's handling of Grover H2O's petitions. 'The appointed Grover Beach city attorney firm has violated the public interest by impairing access to city records, authorizing closed City Council meetings, been complicit in impairing voters' right to circulate and file petitions for recall in violation of California's Constitution and election law, filed appeal of a Superior Court ruling ordering certification of recall without prior City Council approval, has contracts with cities and districts all over California, and charges the City of Grover Beach for part-time civil work more than the state of California pays the attorney general for full-time representation in civil and criminal matters,' GroverH2O's notice of intent said. 'The voters find that the office of appointed city attorney shall be immediately terminated for cause, as against the public interest.' In their statement of reasons to launch the petition included in the initial notice of intent, petitioners argued that the city's current legal representation from firm Lozano Smith also risks a potential conflict of interest becuase they represent multiple government municipalities, though assistant city manager Kristin Eriksson said the firm's other government contracts are all outside of San Luis Obispo County. In California, only around 11 of 482 municipalities have elected city attorneys, with most serving larger cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco and San Diego due to their population size, according to a 2013 League of California Cities guidebook for new city attorneys. In an email, Eriksson said the city doesn't know how many valid signatures were collected by GroverH2O in the 180-day window because no petition was submitted. Eriksson said the city has not received any further communications with the group on further attempts to make the city attorney an elected position. 'Because they did not submit the requisite signatures on the initial petition, they would have to start the process over by first submitting a new Notice of Intent,' Eriksson said.
Hamilton Spectator
33 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools , churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey , alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision . Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump: Ukraine provoked Russian strikes
US President Donald Trump has suggested that Ukraine itself provoked the Russian strikes by conducting Operation Spider's Web. Source: Trump speaking to journalists on board Air Force One Details: Responding to a journalist's question about whether Operation Spider's Web had changed his view of what advantages Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy holds, Trump said it had given Russian leader Vladimir Putin a reason to bomb Ukrainian cities. Quote: "They gave Putin a reason to go in and bomb the hell out of them last night. That's the thing I didn't like about it. When I saw it I said 'Here we go, now it's going to be a strike'." Background: On 1 June 2025, the Security Service of Ukraine carried out a special operation codenamed Pavutyna (Spider's Web) and hit Russian strategic jets at four airfields. Vasyl Maliuk, Head of the Security Service of Ukraine, stated that 34% of strategic carriers of cruise missiles at the main airfields of the Russian Federation had been destroyed. The Security Service of Ukraine officially stated that 41 Russian strategic aircraft had been destroyed by FPV drone strikes, including A-50, Tu-95, Tu-22 M3 and Tu-160 aircraft. The estimated cost of the strategic aircraft destroyed is over US$7 billion. Colonel Ants Kiviselg, Head of the Estonian Defence Forces' Intelligence Centre, reported that the Russian Tu-95 bombers targeted during Operation Spider's Web had been preparing to launch missile strikes on Ukraine. In response to these actions, Russia launched large-scale strikes on Ukraine on the night of 5-6 June, using over 400 drones and 40 cruise and ballistic missiles. The attack resulted in numerous civilian casualties and significant damage to infrastructure. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
