By Dayo Ade Olusola | November 1, 2025
A federal judge has ruled that President Donald Trump’s attempt to require documentary proof of citizenship for federal voter registration is unconstitutional and cannot be enforced.
US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, sitting in Washington, DC, sided with Democratic and civil rights groups who had challenged the Trump administration’s executive order to overhaul US election procedures.
In her ruling on Friday, Kollar-Kotelly concluded that the directive violated the separation of powers, asserting that the president lacks the authority to alter federal election regulations unilaterally.
The decision marks a significant setback for Trump and his allies, who have long argued that stricter voter verification is needed to ensure election integrity.
“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,” the judge wrote in her opinion.
She further noted that on issues involving voter qualifications and the conduct of federal elections, “the Constitution assigns no direct role to the President in either domain.”
Read More: Trump’s Immigration Policy
The ruling builds upon Kollar-Kotelly’s earlier decision to grant a preliminary injunction blocking the policy. Friday’s order grants partial summary judgment in favour of the plaintiffs, permanently prohibiting the proof-of-citizenship mandate from taking effect.
The decision also bars the US Election Assistance Commission (EAC) from taking any steps to add such a requirement to the federal voter registration form.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment following the ruling.
The lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee (DNC), along with several civil rights organisations, will continue as the court considers additional challenges to Trump’s executive order. Among those pending issues is a mandate requiring all mailed ballots to be received, not merely postmarked, by election day.
Multiple legal challenges to Trump’s order remain ongoing. Earlier this year, 19 Democratic attorneys general urged a separate federal court to strike down the executive order, describing it as a “power grab” that undermines state authority.
Washington and Oregon—states that conduct nearly all elections by mail—have also filed their own lawsuits against the measure, arguing it would disenfranchise eligible voters.
The ruling underscores the judiciary’s continued role in limiting executive power over election administration, reaffirming that authority over voter registration and ballot access lies primarily with Congress and individual states.
