A federal judge is allowing President Donald Trump’s executive order regarding election integrity, specifically the handling of mail-in ballots, to stand.
“Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present,” the order from U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, said.
His decision slapped down for now Democrats’ claims that federal efforts to police voter rolls with citizenship checks were not allowed, after Trump issued the order to tighten the security and integrity of mailed ballots.
A report at Just the News explained, “Nichols rejected several of the Democrats’ arguments that Trump’s executive order could disenfranchise millions of voters, including that creating state-by-state citizenship lists to check voter rolls would somehow be harmful, even if they were inaccurate.”
The judge discounted as “speculative” whether any lists of voters in states would contain errors.
“Even if they contain initial inaccuracies, the Executive Order requires the adoption of procedures that will allow individuals to access and, if necessary, update or correct their information in the Lists,” the judge said.
ELECTION INTEGRITY WINS AGAIN as U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols denied Democrat’s request to halt Trump’s Executive Order 14,399 about requiring citizenship and securing mail-in ballots.
Executive Order 14,399 requires states to verify citizenship for federal elections and… pic.twitter.com/20C3dOSeRS
— The SCIF (@TheSCIF) May 28, 2026
Every single person that applies for a mail-in ballot, the burden of proof is on them to prove they are a US citizen.
Understand what’s happening?
A decades long practice of being able to request a mail in ballot without having to prove US citizenship, or even that you live at…
— Brian Cates – Political Columnist & Pundit (@drawandstrike) May 28, 2026
Democrats want you to think this never happens.
Pass The SAVE America Act and clean the Voter Rolls! https://t.co/p0NzCae3L8
— America (@america) May 27, 2026
He also denied claims that the federal government sending information to the states about voters would somehow violate voters’ privacy.
There was no evidence, he said, that sharing information like names and residences “would cause a harm sufficient to establish Article III standing.”
Trump’s plan is for his administration to create lists of eligible U.S. citizen voters and have states deliver ballots to only those.
Reuters commented that, “The decision comes as Trump’s Republicans are locked in a tight battle to keep control of both houses of the U.S. Congress in the November midterm elections.”
That report contended that Trump “has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud.”
That’s even though it is known there were several undue influences on that election, including Mark Zuckerberg’s decision to hand out some $400 million to largely activist local elections officials, and the FBI’s false claims that the scandals documented in Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop were Russian disinformation.
Trump’s order would have the administration compile lists of U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state, and require the U.S. Postal Service to deliver ballots only to voters on each state’s approved mail-in ballot list.
The U.S. Senate’s top Democrat, Chuck Schumer of New York, was among those insisting that the court intervene by issuing a preliminary injunction stopping the vote security plan.
Democrats also claimed the order violated states’ rights.
The case is just one of those brought by Democrats to continue with the relatively lax ballot measures now used.
The other case, brought by Democrat-led states, is scheduled for a hearing next week before Indira Talwani, who was appointed by Democrat Barack Obama to her lifetime position as judge in Boston.
The AP said the result could clear the way “for potential sweeping changes in how American elections are run shortly before this year’s midterm elections.”
Plaintiffs insisted they would continue fighting against the election integrity plan.
“We are ready to resume the fight if and when the administration takes those next steps,” charged Juan Proaño, of the League of United Latin American Citizens, which is opposed to Trump and his plan.
