一群倡导组织周一提起诉讼，挑战唐纳德·特朗普最近的美国总统之行政命令寻求彻底改革美国选举制度，指责总统试图通过“非法行动”来执行“非法命令”
该诉讼称，特朗普单方面重塑联邦选举投票的努力，包括在登记时要求提供公民身份证明和限制邮寄投票截止日期，超出了他作为总统的权限，并有可能剥夺数百万人的投票权。
“该命令违反并颠覆了权力分立，非法僭取了总统通过行政命令宣布选举规则的权力，”诉讼称。“这项命令是对宪法规定的保持美国选举自由和公平的制衡的攻击。”
该诉讼由竞选法律中心和州民主捍卫者基金代表拉丁美洲公民联盟、安全家庭倡议和亚利桑那州学生协会在华盛顿联邦法院提起，要求联邦法官阻止执行该命令的部分内容，并迫使特朗普政府撤销他们发布的任何指导。
它列出了一些被告，包括总统行政办公室、司法部长帕姆·邦迪(Pam Bondi)和司法部、国防部长皮特·赫格塞斯(Pete Hegseth)和国防部，以及美国选举援助委员会(United States Election Assistance Commission)及其专员——一个专注于选举管理的独立政府专员。
特朗普上周签署的行政命令称，美国“未能实施基本和必要的选举保护”。该命令指示司法部起诉政府认为不符合联邦法律的州的选举犯罪，要求国土安全部与埃隆·马斯克的政府效率部合作，审查各州的选民登记名单，并指示选举援助委员会在各州没有制定“统一和非歧视”的计票标准的情况下扣留联邦资金。
“根据宪法，州政府必须按照联邦法律保护美国人的投票权，防止非法投票、歧视、欺诈和其他形式的渎职和错误稀释选举，”命令说。
具体来说，行政命令要求在登记投票时使用的表格上提供全国范围内的公民身份证明，这是对现行选举法的一项改变，也是投票权专家一直反对的一项规定。根据命令，可用于证明的文件包括护照、真实身份证、军人身份证或有效的联邦或州身份证。
但诉讼指出，该命令不接受部落政府签发的身份证明文件或出生证明作为证明形式。该诉讼还对批准的方法提出了质疑，认为只有一半的美国人拥有护照，而且“大多数”真实身份并不表明公民身份。
无论如何，诉讼表明，该命令的方向，选举援助委员会改变表格，增加公民身份证明的要求，可能违反1993年的选民登记法，根据诉讼，给了选举管理委员会“专属权力”来管理表格。
诉讼称，为了与NVRA创建一个简单且易于完成的登记表的意图保持一致，NVRA规定联邦表格不得“包括任何公证或其他正式认证的要求”。
特朗普的命令表明，非公民可以很容易地在联邦选举中投票，但专家们称非公民投票为“一种”极其罕见的现象“那很容易被起诉。根据对2016年选举中超过2300万张选票的研究，官员们只发现了30起疑似非公民投票事件，仅占总投票数的0.0001%。
另外，行政命令还针对邮寄投票，使联邦资助以各州设定选举日之前收到选票的最后期限为条件。特朗普被指控犯有多项联邦罪行，因为他在当选后被撤销的案件中试图推翻2020年的选举。特朗普一再表示，邮寄选票导致了投票欺诈的增加。
该诉讼声称关于邮寄选票的规定是非法的，认为根据宪法中的选举和选举人条款，“各州在确定联邦选举的时间、地点和方式方面拥有广泛的酌处权和灵活性”。
“如果国会愿意，它可以制定选举法，但在不与联邦法律冲突的情况下，各州有权制定和遵循自己的选举法，”诉讼称。
根据诉讼，17个州，加上华盛顿特区、波多黎各和美属维尔京群岛，都有法律允许计算选票，只要选票在选举日之前寄出，并在之后的某个截止日期之前收到。
“这些州中的许多州多年来一直有这样的接收截止日期，国会拒绝通过任何规定选票接收截止日期的法律，”诉讼称。
该诉讼指出，国会“早已确定”联邦选举日是11月的第一个星期二，此外还确定了必须任命总统选举人的日期，但“这方面的进一步监管在很大程度上取决于各州。”该诉讼称，美国最高法院“已经表示，虽然投票必须在选举日之前进行，但选举过程的某些方面，如统计所有选票，自然会在选举日之后进行。”
“司法部长没有权力‘执行’联邦选举日法令，总统也不能命令她这样做。如果州法律允许的话，一个州在选举日之前邮寄的选票有效，并且在选举日之后收到，那么这个州也没有“违反”这些法规。
该诉讼还表明，行政命令可能会使海外公民和军队服役人员更难投票。特朗普签署的行政命令指示国防部长更新这些团体用于登记和请求缺席投票的表格-称为“联邦明信片申请”-包括要求提供公民身份的证明文件以及“选民试图在该州选举中投票的资格证明”。
诉讼指出，这种形式是法律要求的，是1986年通过的《军人和海外公民缺席投票法》的一部分，旨在“保护在军队服役的美国人、他们的家人和其他居住在海外的美国公民的投票权。”该诉讼声称，该命令要求的修改“鉴于国会要求的格式，是不可能的。”
“无论是总统还是国防部长都没有任何法律权力无视UOCAVA的法定要求，向军队和海外选民提供这样的明信片，”诉讼称。
这些条款合在一起将对投票权产生“重大影响”。，诉讼主张。
例如，拉美裔和拉丁美洲民权组织LULAC的成员将受到伤害，如果其一些成员“有资格投票，但往往没有必要的公民身份文件”。诉讼称。该组织预计，登记选民的努力“将会直线下降”。
诉讼称，亚利桑那州学生联合会同样会受到公民身份证明要求的伤害，尽管选民在该州的表格上登记时要求提供公民身份证明。
“即使那些能够登记的成员也面临迫在眉睫的伤害。一些会员将只能通过花费大量的时间、金钱和/或努力来获得或访问DPOC，并且由于DPOC的要求，他们将面临更大的注册困难，”诉讼称。
Organizations file suit challenging Trump's effort to overhaul election system
A group of advocacy organizations filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging Donald Trump's recentexecutive orderseeking to overhaul the U.S. election system, accusing the president of trying to enact "unlawful actions" to enforce "lawless mandates."
The lawsuit alleges that Trump's unilateral efforts to reshape voting in federal elections -- including requiring proof of citizenship when registering and restricting mail-in voting deadlines -- exceeds his authority as president and threatens to strip millions of their voting rights.
"The Order violates and subverts the separation of powers by lawlessly arrogating to the President authority to declare election rules by executive fiat," the lawsuit alleged. "The Order is an attack on the constitutionally mandated checks and balances that keep American elections free and fair."
The lawsuit -- filed in the D.C. federal court by the Campaign Legal Center and State Democracy Defenders Fund on behalf of a League of United Latin American Citizens, Secure Families Initiative and Arizona Students' Association -- asks a federal judge to block the implementation of parts of the order and force the Trump administration to rescind any guidance they issued.
It names a number of defendants, including the Executive Office of the President, the Attorney General Pam Bondi and the Department of Justice, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Department of Defense, as well as the United States Election Assistance Commission and its commissioners -- an independent government commissioner focused on election administration.
Trump's executive order, signed last week, alleged that the United States "fails to enforce basic and necessary election protections." The order instructs the Department of Justice to prosecute elections crimes in states the administration deems are not in compliance with federal law, requires the Department of Homeland Security to work with Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency to review state voter registration lists, and directs the Election Assistance Commission to withhold federal funding if states do not institute "uniform and nondiscriminatory" standards for counting votes.
"Under the Constitution, State governments must safeguard American elections in compliance with Federal laws that protect Americans' voting rights and guard against dilution by illegal voting, discrimination, fraud, and other forms of malfeasance and error," the order said.
Specifically, the executive order calls for proof of citizenship nationwide on the form used when registering to vote -- a change from current election laws and a provision voting rights experts have taken issue with. Documents that can be used for proof, according to the order, include a passport, Real ID, a military ID card, or a valid federal or state ID.
But the lawsuit points out that the order does not accept identification documents issued by Tribal governments or birth certificates as forms of proof. The suit also raises questions about the approved methods, arguing that only half of Americans possess a passport and "most" Real IDs do not indicate citizenship.
Regardless, the lawsuit suggests the order's direction to the Election Assistance Commission to change the form to add the proof of citizenship requirement could violate the Voter Registration Act of 1993, which according to the lawsuit gives the EAC "exclusive authority" to administer the form.
"In keeping with the NVRA's intent to create a simple and easy-to-complete registration form, the NVRA specifies that the Federal Form may not "include any requirement for notarization or other formal authentication," the lawsuit states.
Trump's order suggested that noncitizens can easily vote in federal elections, but experts have called noncitizen voting a "vanishingly rare phenomenon" that is easily prosecuted. According to a study of over 23 million votes cast in the 2016 election, officials identified only 30 suspected incidents of noncitizen voting, only 0.0001% of the total votes cast.
Separately, the executive order also takes aim at mail-in voting, making federal funding conditional on states setting a deadline for ballots to be received by Election Day. Trump -- who was charged with multiple federal crimes for his effort to overturn the 2020 election in cases that were dropped once he was elected -- has repeatedly suggested that mail-in ballots have led to an increase in voting fraud.
The lawsuit claims the provision about mail-in ballots is unlawful, arguing that "states have wide discretion and flexibility" to establish the time, place, and manner of federal elections under the Elections and Electors Clauses in the Constitution.
"Congress can enact election laws if it chooses, but absent a conflict with federal law, States have the power to establish and follow their own election laws," the lawsuit states.
According to the suit, seventeen states, plus Washington D.C., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, have laws that allow ballots to be counted as long as they are mailed by Election Day and received by a certain deadline afterward.
"Many of these States have had such receipt deadlines for many years, and Congress has declined to pass any laws dictating ballot receipt deadlines," the lawsuit says.
The lawsuit notes that Congress has "long established" that the federal Election Day is the first Tuesday in November, in addition to establishing the date that presidential electors must be appointed, but "has left further regulation in this area largely up to States." The lawsuit says the U.S. Supreme Court "has said that while votes must be cast by Election Day, some aspects of the election process, such as tabulating all votes, will naturally take place after Election Day."
"The Attorney General does not have the authority to 'enforce' the federal Election Day statutes, and the President cannot order her to do so. Nor does a State "violate" those statutes when it counts validly cast ballots mailed by Election Day that are received after Election Day if State law so allows," the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit also suggests the executive order could make it harder for citizens abroad and those serving in the military to vote. The executive order signed by Trump directs to secretary of defense to update the form used by these groups to register and request an absentee ballot -- called the "Federal Post Card Application" -- to include a requirement of documentary proof of citizenship as well as "proof of eligibility to vote in elections in the State in which the voter is attempting to vote."
The lawsuit notes this form is required by law as part of the the The Uniformed And Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, passed in 1986 to "protect the voting rights of Americans serving in the military, their families, and other U.S. citizens living abroad." The suit claims the changes required by the order would be "impossible given the format required by Congress."
"Neither the President nor the Secretary of Defense has any legal authority to disregard UOCAVA's statutory requirement to make such a post card available to military and overseas voters," the lawsuit states.
Together, these provisions would have a "significant impact" on voting rights., the lawsuit claims.
Members of LULAC -- a Hispanic and Latin American civil rights organization -- for example, would be harmed if some of its members "who are eligible to vote often do not have the requisite citizenship documents." the lawsuit states. The organization expects that efforts to register voters "will plummet."
The Arizona Students' Association will similarly be harmed by the proof of citizenship requirement, the lawsuit states, despite it being required when voters register on the state form there.
"Even those members who are able to register face imminent harm. Some members will be able to obtain or access DPOC only by spending significant time, money, and/or effort to do so, and will face greater difficulty registering because of the DPOC Requirement," the lawsuit said.
