Federal Courts Strike Down Trump Administration's Proof-of-Citizenship and Voter Roll Demands

In a pair of sweeping legal defeats for the Trump administration, federal courts in Massachusetts and Michigan have struck down central pillars of the White House's effort to overhaul national voting rules ahead of the 2026 midterms.[1][3]

In Boston, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper issued a permanent injunction Wednesday against the president's primary election integrity executive order. The directive had sought to mandate documentary proof of citizenship for anyone using the federal voter registration form and threatened to withhold federal funds from states that count mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day.[3][6]

Casper ruled that the executive branch lacks the constitutional authority to unilaterally rewrite election procedures. She noted that the Constitution assigns the administration of elections to the states and the regulation of federal elections to Congress, concluding that the president's order violated the separation of powers.[3][6]

The ruling makes permanent a preliminary injunction Casper issued last year in a lawsuit brought by a coalition of 19 Democratic state attorneys general. New York Attorney General Letitia James praised the decision as a defense against an "unconstitutional attempt to seize control of our elections."[3]

The administration and its allies reacted sharply to the injunction. A White House deputy characterized the Boston decision as the work of a "rogue" judge appointed by former President Barack Obama, issuing a stark warning that the ruling undermines efforts to secure the ballot box from noncitizen voting.[2]

Meanwhile, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dealt the Justice Department a major blow in its parallel campaign to audit state voter databases. In a 2-1 decision, the appellate panel affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a DOJ lawsuit that sought to force Michigan to hand over unredacted voter rolls.[1][4]

The Justice Department had demanded that Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson provide the state's complete voter file, including sensitive personal data such as partial Social Security numbers, dates of birth, and driver's license numbers. The DOJ argued it needed the data to ensure the state was complying with federal election laws and to check for noncitizen registrants.[1][5]

The 6th Circuit rejected the DOJ's reliance on Title III of the 1960 Civil Rights Act. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Andre Mathis noted that the law was originally designed to preserve records so the federal government could investigate racial discrimination. "Today, the government invokes Title III for an inverse purpose—to ensure that some people have not voted," Mathis wrote.[1][4]

The Michigan ruling marks the Justice Department's tenth consecutive defeat in its nationwide litigation over voter rolls. The DOJ has sued 30 states that refused to voluntarily turn over unredacted data, but federal judges in states including Arizona, California, Maryland, and Wisconsin have consistently dismissed the administration's demands.[4][5][7]

For voters, the rulings mean that the standard federal registration form will not require attached birth certificates or passports, and state-level privacy protections regarding personal identification numbers will remain intact for now.[3][5]

The dual rulings severely constrain the administration's ability to act unilaterally on election security, shifting the battleground entirely to the legislative branch.[3][6]

Acknowledging the legal hurdles of executive action, the White House has intensified its push for the SAVE America Act, a bill stalled in the Senate that would codify the proof-of-citizenship requirement into federal law. The administration has recently begun leveraging other legislative priorities, including a bipartisan housing bill, to force a vote on the election measure.[3][6]