Judge blocks Trump’s election executive order, siding with Democrats who called it overreach

ATLANTA (AP) — A federal judge on Friday blocked President Donald Trump’s attempt to overhaul elections in the U.S., siding with a group of Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the effort as unconstitutional.

The Republican president’s March 25 executive order sought to compel officials to require documentary proof of citizenship for everyone registering to vote for federal elections, accept only mailed ballots received by Election Day and condition federal election grant funding on states adhering to the new ballot deadline.

The attorneys general had argued the directive “usurps the States’ constitutional power and seeks to amend election law by fiat.” The White House had defended the order as “standing up for free, fair and honest elections” and called proof of citizenship a “commonsense” requirement.

Judge Denise J. Casper of the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts said in Friday's order that the states had a likelihood of success as to their legal challenges.

“The Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” Casper wrote.

Casper also noted that, when it comes to citizenship, “there is no dispute (nor could there be) that U.S. citizenship is required to vote in federal elections and the federal voter registration forms require attestation of citizenship.”

Casper also cited arguments made by the states that the requirements would “burden the States with significant efforts and substantial costs” to update procedures.

Messages seeking a response from the White House and the Department of Justice were not immediately returned. The attorneys general for California and New York praised the ruling in statements to The Associated Press, calling Trump's order unconstitutional.

“Free and fair elections are the foundation of this nation, and no president has the power to steal that right from the American people," New York Attorney General Letitia James said.

The ruling is the second legal setback for Trump’s election order. A federal judge in Washington, D.C., previously blocked parts of the directive, including the proof-of-citizenship requirement for the federal voter registration form.

The order is the culmination of Trump’s longstanding complaints about elections. After his first win in 2016, Trump falsely claimed his popular vote total would have been much higher if not for “millions of people who voted illegally.” Since 2020, Trump has made false claims of widespread voter fraud and manipulation of voting machines to explain his loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

He has said his executive order secures elections against illegal voting by noncitizens, though multiple studies and investigations in the states have shown that it's rare and typically a mistake. Casting a ballot as a noncitizen is already against the law and can result in fines and deportation if convicted.

Also blocked in Friday's ruling was part of the order that sought to require states to exclude any mail-in or absentee ballots received after Election Day. Currently, 18 states and Puerto Rico accept mailed ballots received after Election Day as long they are postmarked on or before that date, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Oregon and Washington, which conduct their elections almost entirely by mail, filed a separate lawsuit over the ballot deadline, saying the executive order could disenfranchise voters in their states. When the lawsuit was filed, Washington Secretary of State Steve Hobbs noted that more than 300,000 ballots in the state arrived after Election Day in 2024.

Trump’s order has received praise from the top election officials in some Republican states who say it could inhibit instances of voter fraud and will give them access to federal data to better maintain their voter rolls. But many legal experts say the order exceeds Trump’s power because the Constitution gives states the authority to set the “times, places and manner” of elections, with Congress allowed to set rules for elections to federal office. As Friday's ruling states, the Constitution makes no provision for presidents to set the rules for elections.

During a hearing earlier this month on the states’ request for a preliminary injunction, lawyers for the states and lawyers for the administration argued over the implications of Trump’s order, whether the changes could be made in time for next year’s midterm elections and how much it would cost the states.

Justice Department lawyer Bridget O’Hickey said during the hearing that the order seeks to provide a single set of rules for certain aspects of election operations rather than having a patchwork of state laws and that any harm to the states is speculation.

O’Hickey also claimed that mailed ballots received after Election Day might somehow be manipulated, suggesting people could retrieve their ballots and alter their votes based on what they see in early results. But all ballots received after Election Day require a postmark showing they were sent on or before that date, and that any ballot with a postmark after Election Day would not count.

New York attorney general Letitia James is seen after the New York City Democratic Mayoral Primary Debate at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in the Gerald W. Lynch Theater on Thursday, June 12, 2025 in New York City. (Vincent Alban/The New York Times via AP, Pool)

FILE - President Donald Trump walks across the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, March 25, 2018. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

President Donald Trump speaks during the congressional picnic on the South Lawn of the White House, Thursday, June 12, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

BRUSSELS (AP) — European Union leaders are about to attempt something they’ve never tried before. The chances of failure are significant. Their actions this week could set dangerous precedents and a wrong move could undermine trust among the bloc's 27 member countries for years to come.

At a summit starting on Thursday, many of the leaders will press for tens of billions of euros in frozen Russian assets held in Europe to be used to meet Ukraine’s economic and military needs for the next two years.

Ukraine is on the verge of bankruptcy. The International Monetary Fund estimates that it will require a total of 137 billion euros ($160 billion) in 2026 and 2027. It must get the money by spring. The EU has pledged to come up with the funds, one way or another.

“One thing is very, very clear," European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told EU lawmakers on Wednesday. "We have to take the decision to fund Ukraine for the next two years in this European Council.”

European Council President António Costa, who will chair the summit, has vowed to keep the leaders negotiating until an agreement is reached, even if it takes days.

The European Commission has proposed that the leaders use some of the frozen assets — totaling 210 billion euros ($246 billion) — to underwrite a 90 billion-euro ($105 billion) “reparations loan” to Ukraine. The U.K., Canada and Norway would fill the gap.

The plan is contentious. The European Commission insists that its reasoning and legal basis are sound. But the European Central Bank has warned that international trust in the euro single currency could be damaged, if the leaders are suspected of seizing the assets.

Most of the frozen assets belong to the Russian Central Bank and are held in the financial clearing house Euroclear, which is based in Brussels. Belgium fears Russian reprisals, through the courts or in other more nefarious ways.

Euroclear fears for its reputation. It believes the commission’s idea is legally shaky and that international investors might look elsewhere, if it transfers the Russian assets to an EU debt instrument, as von der Leyen's plan demands.

Last week, the Russian Central Bank announced that it's suing Euroclear in a Moscow court. The chances that the case will succeed appear limited, but the move does increase pressure on all parties before the summit.

The commission, the EU’s powerful executive branch, has proposed a second option. It could try to raise the money on international markets, much in the way it underwrote a major economic recovery fund after the start of the coronavirus pandemic.

Belgium prefers this option. But plan B would require all 27 leaders to agree for it to work, and Hungary refuses to fund Ukraine. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán sees himself as a peacemaker. He's also Russian President Vladimir Putin’s closest ally in Europe.

In contrast, plan A — the reparations loan — only requires a majority of around two-thirds of member countries to pass. Hungary can't veto it alone. Slovakia might say no. Belgium, Bulgaria, Italy and Malta remain to be convinced.

Even if all six countries reject the loan to Ukraine — which would only be refunded if Russia ends its war and pays hundreds of billions of euros in war damages, something many Europeans doubt Putin would do — they still wouldn't have a blocking minority.

Running a steamroller over Belgium, which has a great stake in the outcome and deep concerns about the loan, could undermine the entire European project, making it infinitely more difficult to find voting majorities on other issues in the future.

But on the eve of the summit, it remained unclear precisely how the plan would work, what kind of guarantees each country would give to reassure Belgium it doesn't face Russia alone, and even whether the leaders can actually approve it outright this week.

“It’s a really new approach. Everyone has questions,” according to a senior EU diplomat involved in the negotiations, which continued on Wednesday. “You’re talking about mobilizing public finances. Parliaments might need to weigh in. It’s not easy.”

The diplomat was appointed to brief reporters on the latest developments on the condition that he not be named.

FILE - A view of the headquarters of Euroclear in Brussels, on Oct. 23, 2025. (AP Photo/Geert Vanden Wijngaert, File)

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen addresses a media conference regarding Ukraine's financing needs for 2026-2027 at EU headquarters in Brussels, Wednesday, Dec. 3, 2025. (AP Photo/Harry Nakos)

FILE - From left, European Council President Antonio Costa, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen arrive for an EU Summit at the European Council building in Brussels, March 6, 2025. (AP Photo/Omar Havana, File)