In a ruling dated May 28, a federal judge allowed President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to create federal voter lists and tighten rules for mail-in voting to remain in place for now, rejecting a request from Democrats to block the order before agencies begin implementing it.
The March 31 executive order directs federal officials to compile state-by-state lists of voting-age U.S. citizens using federal citizenship data and share those lists with state election officials, as Zeale News previously reported. It also instructs the U.S. Postal Service to develop rules limiting mail-ballot delivery to voters on approved state lists and create stricter tracking requirements for mail-in ballots.
>> Trump signs executive order restricting mail-in voting ahead of 2026 midterms <<
The plaintiffs — the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, Democratic Governors Association, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York filed the suit April 1, one day after Trump signed the order.
U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee in Washington, D.C., rejected the plaintiff’s request for a preliminary injunction in the latest ruling. The plaintiffs had argued that Trump’s order exceeds presidential authority because the Constitution assigns primary responsibility for election rules to states and Congress. They also alleged the voter-list provision violates the Privacy Act by requiring federal officials to compile and share personal data without lawful authorization, according to court documents.
Nichols sided with the administration’s position that it was premature to block the order because federal agencies have not yet carried out the contested provisions. He ruled that the challengers failed to show the kind of imminent harm required for emergency relief.
“The Court recognizes that the Postal Service may ultimately issue a final rule that directly affects Plaintiffs or their members, or that the Government may develop State Citizenship Lists that omit specific individuals due to particularized flaws,” Nichols wrote in the order. “Plaintiffs may, of course, renew their motions if and when those future actions occur. Until then, however, Plaintiffs cannot show that preliminary injunctive relief is warranted.”
He also declined to block the order on Privacy Act grounds at this stage, writing that plaintiffs “fail to demonstrate that such action — that is, the sharing of name, age, and residence information between and among government agencies, if already known to the federal government — would cause a harm sufficient” to support the lawsuit.
The decision leaves the door open for further legal challenges if the administration begins implementing the order. According to AP News, a separate lawsuit challenging the order is pending in federal court in Boston.
The ruling comes as Trump and Republicans attempt to maintain control of Congress in the 2026 midterm elections. Trump has urged Congress to pass the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, which would require documented proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.