Written by: Kylee Peisher
On March 31, 2026, President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” which imposes new regulations on voter identification and mail-in ballots in Federal elections. Two days later, the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, along with several other plaintiffs, filed a complaint in the District of Massachusetts challenging the order as unconstitutional on multiple grounds. Although the case is in its early stages, it marks the second time in just over one year that the federal court system has been confronted with the issue of whether to reinforce or redefine the Executive’s traditionally limited authority in the realm of election regulation and independent federal agencies.
WHAT DOES THE EXECUTIVE ORDER DO?
This executive order does two key things. First, it requires the Department of Homeland Security to, at least sixty days before each Federal election, send each State election official a list of residents who are “confirmed” U.S. citizens and who will be over eighteen on Election Day. Second, it requires the USPS Postmaster General to implement several new regulations: requiring states that permit mail-in or absentee ballots to send a list of such eligible voters to the USPS; prohibiting the USPS from delivering ballots to individuals not on these lists; and imposing additional security requirements, such as individualized barcodes, on outbound ballot mail.
WHAT ARE THE LEGAL CONTENTIONS OF THE LAWSUIT?
The executive order asserts that the president is acting within the scope of his authority under a combination of his powers granted by Article II of the U.S. Constitution and specific provisions of federal statutory law. Article II requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and the U.S. Code likewise prohibits non-U.S. citizens from registering to vote or voting in federal elections, subject to fines or imprisonment. The order also invokes an obligation to “enhance election integrity” and “[maintain] public confidence in election outcomes,” citing the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, Help America Vote Act of 2002, and the Constitution’s guarantee of a republican form of government to the states under Article IV.
The plaintiffs challenge the order on several grounds. Constitutionally, they argue that the power to oversee federal elections and the USPS is specifically delegated to Congress, not the Executive, under Article I’s Elections Clause and Postal Clause—which renders the order a violation of separation of powers. They further contend that, by compelling states to exercise their own authority over election regulation in a particular way, the order also violates the Tenth Amendment’s reservation of powers to the States. Additionally, they argue that the scheme imposes an undue burden on the rights of eligible voters in violation of the Fifth Amendment. The complaint also raises two statutory claims: one for “acting under color of law to deny any qualified citizen the right to vote” under the Voting Rights Act, and another for the proposed databases violating the Privacy Act’s notice and accuracy requirements regarding the government’s maintenance and use of personal information.
WHAT’S NEXT?
The Trump administration has yet to file a response to the plaintiffs’ complaint. It is noteworthy, however, that this current executive order and lawsuit arose less than six months after the District of D.C. issued a permanent injunction barring enforcement of parts of a prior executive order addressing citizenship verification and election regulation. The challenged provision of that order—dated March 25, 2025—directed the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), an independent federal agency, to implement a documentary proof-of-U.S.-citizenship requirement in the national mail voter registration form. In doing so, the Court rejected the Administration’s arguments under Article II, in light of both the Constitution’s textual delegation of election administration to Congress and the States, and the Congressional statutory intent for the EAC to be an independent agency not subject to direct presidential control.
As the current lawsuit unfolds, the 2026 executive order appears to raise concerns similar to those presented by the prior order, particularly regarding its direction of USPS. The USPS was created by Congress pursuant to its constitutional power to “establish Post Offices and post Roads.” Although the USPS is an executive agency and the President has the power to appoint members of its Board of Governors, it is also expressly defined by statute as “independent.” For instance, these Governors are statutorily required to represent the public interest and may only be removed for cause before their seven-year terms expire. Likewise, Congress expressly reserved to itself the power to “alter, amend, or repeal” the statutory provisions governing USPS’s authority and operations. The order’s substantive effect on election administration likewise further implicates the issues of constitutional delegation addressed in the prior suit.
In turn, while this executive order entails different directives and federal agencies, it appears to raise similar constitutional issues to those presented by the March 2025 order—in which the Court ultimately reinforced the traditionally limited scope of executive power in the context of election regulation and independent agencies. This recent holding, in turn, may well bolster the likelihood of the District of Massachusetts adopting a similar approach as it addresses the ongoing suit.
Sources:
18 U.S.C. §§ 611, 1015.
39 U.S.C. §§ 201-202.
Ashley Lopez & Benjamin Swasey, Trump signs a new executive order on voting. Experts say he lacks the authority, NPR(Apr. 1, 2026), https://www.npr.org/2026/03/31/nx-s1-5508948/trump-voter-list-mail-ballots-executive-order.
Barbour-Knight v. Civil Serv. Comm’n, 703 A.2d 572, 575, (1997).
Exec. Order No. 14248, 90 Fed. Reg. 14005 (Mar. 25, 2025).
Exec. Order No. 14399, 91 Fed. Reg. 17125 (Mar. 31, 2026).
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Exec. Off. of the President, 808 F.Supp.3d 29 (D.D.C. Oct. 31, 2025).
Plaintiff’s Complaint, League of Women Voters of Mass. v. Trump, No. 1:26-cv-11549 (D. Mass. Apr. 2, 2026).
Scott Bomboy, The Constitution and the Postal System, Nat’l Const.Ctr. (Dec. 19, 2024), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/the-constitution-and-the-postal-system.
U.S. Const. art. II, § 3.
U.S. Const. art. I, §§ 4, 8.