‘No specific power for the President in the election’: Federal Judge blocks Trump’s executive order on polling laws; It is said that it overtakes the powers of the President

A federal judge on Friday blocked the controversial executive order of President Donald Trump, which was aimed at rebuilding the US election processes, decided that it violates the constitution and violates the rights of states on elections.US District Judge Dennis J at Massachusetts. Casper gave an initial prohibition against the directive of 25 March, siding with the alliance of the Democratic State Attorney General, who argued that the order was an unconstitutional effort to end state election laws.Judge Casper wrote in his judgment, “The Constitution does not give the President no specific powers in the elections.”Trump’s order demanded implementation of several comprehensive changes in the federal elections, making compulsory citizenship dictatorship evidence for voter registration, rejecting the mail-in ballots obtained by the election day and linking the federal election grants with new rules to compliance with the states.The states challenging the order said that it “exposes the constitutional power of the states and wants to amend the election law by Fiat.” The Biden administration, which inherited litigation, did not support Trump’s order. However, Trump and his colleagues have maintained instructions to secure the elections, at that time defended with the White House as “standing in free, fair and honest elections”.Casper said that the states had shown “possibility of success” in their legal challenges and accepted their concerns about administrative and financial burden. He also said that the federal registration forms already require voters to confirm their American citizenship and that nonsuction voting is already illegal under the federal law.This is the second judicial shock for Trump’s order. Washington, a federal judge in DC, blocked parts of the first instruction, including the proof-of-sitigation mandate.The order was inherent in the long-standing claims of the voter fraud of Trump-a debate by repeated independent reviews and several state-led investigations. After losing the 2020 election, Trump has continued to promote baseless allegations about election integrity, including false claims about polling machines and illegal ballot papers.Critics argue that voters are threatened to separate from the executive order, especially in states such as Oregon and Washington who rely a lot on mail-in voting. In a separate legal challenge, these states said that the order of hundreds of thousands of ballots would be posted on time, but received after the day of election. In Washington alone, more than 300,000 such ballots arrived late in 2024.Trump’s order was supported among the Republican election officials in some states, who said that this voter could help in preventing fraud and providing access to federal data to purify the old voter rolls. But constitutional experts have warned that the President lacks the right to implement such nationwide election rules – the power reserved for the states, the Congress is only able to interfere in the federal elections.During the hearing of a court earlier this month, Justice Attorney Bridget O’Hickki argued with the aim of making persistent standards in the states and dismissing concerns about cost or viability as speculative. He also suggested that latest ballot papers could be tampered with, although Judge Casper said that such ballot papers already require a postmark on the election day or first, and later on to count anyone obtained with postmarks.Friday’s decision abandoned the future of Trump’s order uncertainly and left efforts for state officials to maintain control over their own election processes.