A judge on Thursday declined, for now, to block an executive order signed by President Trump in March that targeted mail-in voting and directed the creation of a citizen database to help guide states on voting eligibility.
The ruling allows the Trump administration to continue pursuing steps to include the federal government in the administration of elections that are otherwise controlled by states. The administration has proposed changes to the Postal Service and that the Department of Homeland Security compile state-by-state voter rolls using Social Security data and other information taken from federal databases.
In a 26-page opinion, Judge Carl J. Nichols wrote that it was premature for the court to intervene. He found that the Trump administration had not carried out much of the order, leaving most of the damage predicted by the lawsuit still speculative. He went on to say that if there is evidence that these changes burden government officials or cause confusion, the groups under the Democratic Alliance who have filed lawsuits to block this order can go back to court.
“The court recognizes that the Postal Service may ultimately issue a final order that directly affects the plaintiffs or their constituents, or that the government may develop a list of state citizens that omits certain individuals because of certain errors,” he wrote. “Plaintiffs may renew their motions if such future actions occur.”
The decision came as the Trump administration moved aggressively since last year to consolidate voter registration data at the national level over the objections of state officials and voting rights groups. Several federal judges have rejected administration efforts to request voter information from states.
A group of Democratic organizations and lawmakers sued to stop the executive order, saying it was a violation of federal privacy law to compile a central database of eligible voters and illegal interference in federal elections to distribute that data among local officials. The lawsuit included three separate lawsuits brought by groups including the NAACP, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which includes Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Hakeem Jeffries, the Senate and several House leaders.
“E-mail voting is safe and secure, a hallmark of our free and fair elections,” said Mr. Schumer in a statement. “Trump's order is not about election integrity. It suppresses voters, plain and simple.”
During a hearing in May, attorneys representing the Democratic Party told Judge Nichols, a Trump appointee, that the risk of abuse was significant. They painted a bleak picture of the upcoming election season, saying the Trump administration appears intent on disrupting the system and empowering low-level officials to represent the administration in police elections.
The groups stressed that the federal voter list, if created, could be prone to contain outdated or erroneous data, and warned that local officials could use the list to exclude legitimate voters arbitrarily. They also warned that the order would direct the Postal Service to act outside of its legal authority, forcing it to take on a new role in monitoring the vote.
In court, the Department of Justice appeared to acknowledge those concerns, telling Judge Nichols that the lists were considered references by state election boards and acknowledged that they would not be a complete or up-to-date register of legal voters.
Stephen M. Pezzi, a lawyer for the Justice Department, said the government was still working to evaluate the order and had not yet begun gathering the information it envisioned. Mr. Pezzi agreed to Judge Nichols' request to notify the court when the government begins taking steps to consolidate the lists.
But Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, appeared to contradict that position during Senate testimony in May, indicating that the Justice Department was working with the White House to implement the order.
Asked about the testimony of Mr. Blanche and the government's progress, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice said, “The department has the legal authority to enforce our state's election laws, including requesting voter rolls to check for interns.”
“It works with other agencies within the government to achieve the goals,” he said. “I think they're the right goals to make sure we have free and fair elections, to make sure those are implemented, whether it's the DOJ that needs to implement them or some other federal agency.”
In Thursday's order, Judge Nichols appeared to be willing to give the administration the benefit of the doubt until there are concrete details about the list. He wrote that it remains to be seen what the country's election officials can use, but it is not clear that the federal government's involvement was illegal.
“This order does not authorize any state action once the list has been transferred to it, and in any event, no infrastructure for integration or transfer of the list has been established; no list has been created or transferred; and no state has taken action with respect to any list,” he wrote.
While Mr. When Trump signed the executive order in March, he thought the order might face legal challenges, but said he thought it was “foolish”.
“You might have to find a corrupt judge,” he said as he showed reporters the signed order. “That's the only way it can be changed.”
The order requires the Postal Service to take its first compliance steps by May 30, issuing a notice on that date of the rulemaking process to adopt the changes.
Mr. Trump also asked the Postal Service to deliver ballots only to people deemed eligible. Postal and election experts have criticized that as an illegal overreach of the president's authority.
