Federal Judge Strikes Down Proof Of Citizenship Requirement For Voting

A federal judge ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s request to add a documentary proof of citizenship requirement to the federal voter registration form cannot be enforced.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, a Clinton appointee, sided with left-wing and “civil rights” groups that had sued the Trump Administration over his executive order aimed at bolstering election integrity.

The order, titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” directs federal agencies like the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Social Security Administration (SSA), and Department of State to provide states access to federal databases to verify voter eligibility and citizenship during registration. Agencies under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) are also required to assess citizenship before distributing federal voter registration forms to public assistance enrollees.

In order to do so, the order mandates documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration in federal elections. In order to do so, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) was directed to update the national mail voter registration form to require proof, such as a passport, birth certificate, or Real ID-compliant driver’s license.

States that fail to comply with the directive would be at risk of losing federal funding, the order states.

The order has been met with several legal challenges from left-wing groups, including the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and attorneys general from 19 Democrat-controlled states.

On Friday, Judge Kollar-Kotelly ruled that the proof of citizenship directive is an unconstitutional violation of separation of powers. “Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the States and to Congress, this Court holds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote in her opinion.

She further ruled that on matters related to setting qualifications for voting and regulating federal election procedures “the Constitution assigns no direct role to the President in either domain.”

The latest opinion echoes comments made by the judge when she issued a preliminary injunction against voter ID provisions back in April. “Consistent with that allocation of power, Congress is currently debating legislation that would affect many of the changes the President purports to order,” the Clinton-appointed judge found at the time. “No statutory delegation of authority to the Executive Branch permits the President to short-circuit Congress’s deliberative process by executive order.”

Friday’s decision grants the plaintiffs a partial summary judgment that prohibits the proof of citizenship provision from going into effect. It also permanently bars the U.S. Election Assistance Commission from adding the requirement to the federal voting form.

Both voter ID and bolstering noncitizen voting enforcement have long been popular policy positions among voters. According to a poll from Gallup taken just before the 2024 presidential election, 84 percent of U.S. adults were in favor of requiring voters to show identification while 83 percent supported requiring proof of citizenship when registering for the first time.

Such policies are also popular along party lines, with 67 percent of Democrats and 84 percent of independents expressing support for mandatory voter ID. Among Republicans support is near unanimous, with 98 percent of respondents expressing support.

The breakdown on proof of citizenship requirements was similar, with 66 percent of Democrats, 84 percent of Independents and 96 percent of Republicans supporting the idea.

Action on election integrity and voter ID laws in particular have long been a focus of President Trump’s agenda. “The system, it’s not a question of being broken — the system is corrupt,” Trump told Breitbart News back in August.

“It’s a corrupt system. A mail-in ballot will always be corrupt. When you go to a polling location and they want your identification and everything, the way — you can’t really vote unless it’s a legit deal. If you have mail-in ballots, nobody has any idea where it’s coming from or where it’s going to and then it travels through so many hands. Jimmy Carter came out a long time ago with a number of highly respected people and they wrote something, and the one thing that come out loud and clear is that mail-in ballots are corrupt. France had it, a lot of countries had it and they went away from it now.”

I did a little digging on the Real ID Act. It's true purpose is to begin your multi-database adventures by government and authorized companies which are live real time tattle tales

Prescribed meds, professional licenses, gun purchases, ammo purchases, banking activities, travel history of not only you, but all of your contacts, family, and friends. Marriages, child support, health information.

You are the onion and the database peels all of you in milliseconds for any "authorized requestor" in real time.

All this because we had an attack on our country by people we invited to be here. The entire Patriot Act needs to be put down like the mess it is.

One cannot enter a federal building without a Real ID. You know, the place the judge hangs out all day with gates, guards, metal detectors, chemical trace sniffing systems, guarded parking, restaurant, pharmacy, and Healthcare nurse services.

Start sunsetting all this crap. Fire them all.

Only restart an open government when every agency can come to congress with a line item detailed budget request, but also an accounting statement providing the same for the prior 14 years that congress just omnibus porkulated us. They can't do it.

Imagine going to the bank once each year for the money you want to borrow. (That's congress) Now imagine you tell the bank you need five times your prior spending this next year. The bank wants to see your records. You tell the bank (congress) that you just don't know where they are, how much, who, where, why, and when it was spent, just that you need more or our democracy is at stake, and you've found six federal judges to back you in case anyone asks for receipts.

That isn't a bank. That isn't congress. That is a bunch of criminals posing as congress (bankers). They belong in jail. Any bank officer would be in handcuffs in jail for such practices!

We decide to let them feed us, house us, provide healthcare for us, and decide which girls swimsuit looks best on our sons.

Americans deserve every last bit of this disaster and then even more, real good and hard, too.

Federal judges have caused major irreparable harm to their institution. They have outed themselves as petty political opportunists that use the federal Beltway to employ their families, friends, favor investors, favor NGO'S and NFP's, and are complete hypocrites. I think a careful analysis of their case work product would find conflicts of interest so Hugh and series that you could drive one of Elon Musks trucks right through those holes. Really. They have no business getting involved in executive branch orders. They have no standing. They don't even wait for a litigant to file a complaint. They create them for anything Trump does. That is not how its supposed to work.

Just remember....we, the people have no standing in matters we try to bring to a courtroom. Only Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Nancy Pelosi have standing.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.