Attorney General James Sues President Trump for Unconstitutional Attempt to Seize Control of Elections

NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced that she and a coalition of 18 other attorneys general are suing to stop President Trump’s unconstitutional attempt to seize control of elections. On March 25, the President issued an Executive Order asserting unprecedented authority over elections and baselessly demanding changes to how states administer them. Attorney General James and the coalition allege that this is an unlawful and dangerous power grab that blatantly disregards state sovereignty, congressional authority, the fundamental separation of powers, and limits on presidential power. The attorneys general are asking the court to block several of the President’s voter suppression measures, arguing they will unlawfully impose significant barriers to registering to vote and to voting, and create confusion for voters seeking to participate in free and fair elections.

“Donald Trump’s attempt to control our elections, intimidate voters, and limit Americans’ right to vote is unconstitutional, undemocratic, and frankly, un-American,” said Attorney General James. “We are a democracy – not a monarchy – and this Executive Order is an authoritarian power grab. With this Order, this President is prioritizing his own quest for unchecked power above the rights and will of the public. My office is fighting back to preserve our democracy – one that is fair, just, and accountable to the people.”

Attorney General James and the coalition argue that the President’s Order could widely disenfranchise voters and place unsustainable burdens on the states. For example, the Order attempts to prohibit states from counting mail-in ballots arriving after Election Day, even if they were postmarked on time. The attorneys general assert this fundamental misinterpretation of election law would disrupt state vote-by-mail processes, which are designed to remove barriers to voting and increase participation. In addition, the Order directs the independent, bipartisan Election Assistance Commission (the Commission) to institute a proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form, an action neither the Constitution nor Congress has authorized. The attorneys general assert that these proposals would create unnecessary obstacles, effectively disenfranchising millions of eligible voters.

The attorneys general argue that the president’s efforts are explicitly illegal. The National Voting Rights Act (NVRA) already requires attestation of citizenship under penalty of perjury when registering to vote, and the President has no unilateral authority to change this requirement. Apart from Congress, only the Commission has the power to alter the federal voter registration form, and even then, in a manner consistent with the NVRA and only in consultation with the states. By ordering the Commission to take these actions, which would themselves be unlawful, the attorneys general allege the President is undermining the Commission’s independence and trampling over legal safeguards that Congress created specifically to maintain its neutrality.

In the lawsuit, Attorney General James and the coalition emphasize that elections in the United States are administered by the states – not the federal government. Each state maintains its own voter rolls, designs its own ballots, and certifies its own results. The President’s Order would force states to divert election staff from other critical tasks, preventing them from effectively serving residents and implementing their own election priorities. The attorneys general argue that the President lacks the authority to impose these burdens on state and local election officials. Moreover, states that refuse to comply with this unconstitutional Order face severe penalties. The President has directed the Commission to withhold essential federal election and counterterrorism funds from noncompliant states – a coercive measure that would throw the electoral system into chaos. The Order even threatens states with federal investigations and potential prosecution. The attorneys general contend there is no legal basis for these threats, which violate the states’ constitutional authority over elections and ignore Congress’s power of the purse.

Attorney General James and the coalition argue that the President has no authority to unilaterally change election laws. The Constitution explicitly grants states the power to administer elections and gives Congress the authority to regulate voting laws for federal elections and allocate election funding. The President, however, has no constitutional role in making or altering these laws. The attorneys general assert that with this Order, the President is not only acting without statutory authority, but also violating the Constitution. He is dramatically overstepping the limits of presidential power, disregarding the separation of powers, and attempting to exert control over both states’ independent choices on election administration and an independent, congressionally created agency. The attorneys general argue that his actions constitute a direct attack on the nation’s electoral system and fundamental democratic principles.

Attorney General James and the coalition are urging the court to block these unlawful actions that harm voters and the country’s democratic foundation itself.

Joining Attorney General James in this lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin.