Trump executive order seeks to reform voting process; privacy issues are problematic

To address perceived problems with the integrity of American elections – long a subject of national debate – President Donald Trump signed an executive order that is intended to restore public confidence in the electoral process. The order outlines a comprehensive set of reforms designed to strengthen voter verification, enforce federal election laws, and ensure that only eligible U.S. citizens participate in elections.

Trump said the measures are needed to ensure free, fair, and honest elections. He has stated that election integrity reforms must prioritize paper ballots, same-day voting, proof of citizenship, and voter ID requirements. The executive order seeks to implement these principles.

A key focus of the order is enforcement of the citizenship requirement for federal elections. While federal law already prohibits non-citizens from voting, the order claims that many states simply fail to verify voter eligibility adequately, a claim that has been criticized as invalid and which is likely to be central to the legal challenges that are sure to come.

Indeed, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was quick to condemn Trump’s executive order, saying it will “upend U.S. elections and disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. This directive represents a significant overreach of executive power and poses a direct threat to the fundamental right to vote.”

Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, said, “We will do everything in our power to stop this unconstitutional attack on the right to vote to ensure that every eligible American can participate in our democracy. We will see President Trump in court.”

“We’ll see what the Constitution and the courts have to say about this,” the CATO Institute said. “Under our American system, voting and voter registration are predominantly responsibilities of the states, with Congress constitutionally empowered to add some overlays through legislation of general applicability. A president cannot change those basics by putting out an executive order, nor may he commandeer the states, through funding blackmail or otherwise, into acting as instruments of his pleasure.”

Eliza Sweren-Becker, senior counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice’s voting rights and elections program, described Trump’s order as “an astonishing and unprecedented voter suppression” effort.

The voting rights group Fair Fight called the order a “MAGA fever dream.”

The legal challenges to what Trump is trying to do will be swift and harsh.

Trump’s order mandates that the U.S. Election Assistance Commission require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship on its national mail voter registration forms. Acceptable forms of documentation include U.S. passports, REAL ID-compliant identification, official military IDs indicating citizenship, or any government-issued photo ID accompanied by proof of citizenship.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Social Security Administration (SSA), and Department of State will now be required to provide state election officials with access to relevant federal records to confirm voter eligibility and citizenship status. SSA is required to provide access to the Death Master File and other databases to help states remove deceased individuals from voter rolls. States that fail to comply with these requirements could face enforcement actions from the Department of Justice.

It also directs DHS, in conjunction with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to use subpoenas to gain access to state voter registration lists and list maintenance methods and to scrutinize each “for consistency with federal requirements.”

While intended to prevent illegal voting, this provision raises concerns about the privacy of voter information, as it involves the sharing and potential storage of personally identifiable information (PII). The extent to which data security protocols will be enforced to prevent unauthorized access, however, remains a crucial issue.

The order mandates documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when individuals register to vote. Election officials must record details of the provided documents, including the issuing authority, expiration date, and any unique identifying numbers. The measure is supposed to prevent fraudulent registration, but it also introduces the need for strong privacy safeguards to protect sensitive PII.

But while the order emphasizes compliance with existing privacy and data security laws, questions remain about how voter data will be stored, accessed, and protected from misuse.

To further secure the voting process, the order prohibits non-citizens from accessing election equipment, ballots, or any other materials used in the administration of federal elections. The point of this is to prevent potential foreign interference, but which could also result in additional vetting processes that could require the collection of personal data from election workers.

The impact of this provision on voter privacy though will depend on how it is implemented, and whether safeguards are in place to ensure that personal information is not misused or exposed.

The order also addresses the security of voting systems by mandating updates to the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 to require voter-verifiable paper records and prohibiting the use of barcoded or QR-coded ballots that conceal vote choices. By doing this, the administration hopes to enhance transparency and to make audits more reliable. Federal grant funding for election administration will be conditioned on states’ compliance with the updated standards.

The requirement is framed as a security enhancement, but also serves as a privacy measure by minimizing the potential for electronic manipulation or tracking of individual votes.

The order directs the Attorney General to establish information-sharing agreements with state election officials to investigate election fraud. This initiative involves the collection and exchange of voter-related data, raising concerns about how personal information will be handled in criminal investigations. The intention behind this is to prosecute fraudulent voting, but the potential risks to voter privacy and data security will depend on the oversight and restrictions that are placed on the use of such information.

Enforcing voter list maintenance requirements is another major component of the order. The Department of Justice is instructed to ensure that states comply with federal laws mandating accurate voter rolls. The Social Security Administration is required to provide access to databases such as the Death Master File to assist states in removing deceased individuals from registration lists. While the effort seeks to prevent voter fraud, there are risks that improper cross-referencing or data inaccuracies could lead to wrongful voter purges.

The executive order also calls for greater oversight and enforcement of existing federal laws, including the National Voter Registration Act and the Help America Vote Act.

Trump’s executive order further calls for uniform election integrity measures across states. The order reiterates that federal law sets a single Election Day and that ballots must be both cast and received by that date. The practice of counting ballots received after Election Day, which is allowed in some states, has been likened to permitting in-person voters to cast ballots days after an election has concluded.

The Trump administration’s attempt here is to enforce strict compliance with federal statutes by eliminating post-election ballot disputes that could undermine public trust in electoral outcomes.

To combat foreign influence in U.S. elections, the order instructs the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury to enforce laws prohibiting foreign contributions to federal, state, and local campaigns. Additionally, the order targets non-governmental organizations that receive federal funds but engage in political activities, ensuring that taxpayer money is not used to support partisan electioneering efforts.

The order also seeks to undo the impact of Executive Order 14019, signed by President Biden, which expanded federal agencies’ roles in voter registration efforts. Agencies are now required to report on their compliance with rescinding that order and ceasing any activities related to implementing it. This move is intended to prevent federal agencies from engaging in partisan voter mobilization efforts.

The administration argues that the reforms are necessary to bring the U.S. in line with election security practices used in other democratic nations. Countries such as India and Brazil require voter identification tied to biometric databases, while the U.S. largely relies on self-attestation for citizenship.

Germany and Canada use hand-counted paper ballots to enhance election integrity, whereas the American electoral system employs a patchwork of methods that can lead to chain-of-custody issues. Similarly, Denmark and Sweden restrict mail-in voting to those unable to vote in person and do not count late-arriving ballots, while U.S. elections now see widespread mail-in voting with ballots sometimes received well after Election Day.

Trump’s order will most certainly face legal challenges from states and advocacy groups that argue it imposes undue restrictions on voting rights. The administration, for its part, maintains the measures are necessary to uphold federal election laws and protect the voting process from fraud, errors, and foreign interference.

By conditioning federal election-related funding on compliance with these reforms, the administration seeks to ensure that states adhere to the standards of election integrity Trump’s order intends to put in place.

The success of his executive order will depend largely on its enforcement and the response from state governments. Election security remains a contentious issue in American politics, and these reforms undoubtedly will be pivotal in shaping the national debate leading into the next election cycle. Whether they achieve the intended goal of restoring public confidence in elections is yet to be seen.

Article Topics

elections  |  identity verification  |  U.S. Government  |  United States  |  voter identification