Federal Judge Overturns Key Aspects of Trump’s Election Integrity Order

A federal judge, appointed by President Obama, recently ruled against significant parts of President Trump’s executive order aimed at election integrity. This decision has drawn a strong warning from White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller regarding the current judicial climate.

U.S. District Judge Dennis J. Casper ruled that crucial elements of Trump’s March 25, 2025 executive order, titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of America’s Elections,” exceeded presidential authority and violated the separation of powers outlined in the Constitution. According to Casper, the order not only enforced existing laws but attempted to create or modify election rules independently.

In his decision, Casper stated, “While the Constitution grants the president ‘executive power’ and instructs him to ‘ensure that the laws are faithfully executed,’ it does not confer specific electoral powers to the president.” He added that the president “plays no direct role in the process” of electing electors and holds “no authority to control state officials responsible for appointing electors.”

Miller responded to the ruling on social media, expressing hope that Chief Justice John Roberts “recognizes the path these corrupt judges have laid out for our judiciary.”

Judge Blocks Key Provisions

Even though Chief Justice Roberts heads the federal judiciary, he doesn’t have direct control over lower court decisions. Miller’s comments reflect ongoing criticisms from conservatives about the Supreme Court’s perceived inactivity in handling lower court rulings that affect Trump administration policies.

Judge Casper had previously issued a preliminary injunction against significant elements of the order while the litigation unfolded. After over a year in court, the judge sided mostly with the states that challenged the order.

This lawsuit involved 19 states contesting the order and was heard in the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts. California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a lead plaintiff in the case, celebrated the ruling as a win for the states, claiming, “We sued President Trump and won, arguing that he attempted to unilaterally impose voting restrictions nationwide. Today, the federal district court ruled that every provision we challenged was unlawful, reaffirming that regulating elections is a power reserved for the states and Congress.”

Casper’s ruling now permanently blocks the government from imposing requirements for citizenship proof on federal voter registration forms, altering voting rules for military and overseas voters, and threatening to withhold federal election funds from states that don’t comply with certain election regulations, such as not counting ballots received after Election Day.

Casper characterized some elements of the order as “so egregious and in violation of the separation of powers under the United States Constitution that they are unconstitutional and invalid.”

Furthermore, Casper found that parts of Trump’s order conflicted with federal laws, such as the National Voter Registration Act and the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.

Background on the Executive Order

President Trump signed the executive order in March 2025, emphasizing that state officials had not sufficiently adhered to court rulings and federal law. He argued that measures were necessary to enhance election integrity and rebuild public confidence in federal elections.

The White House had characterized the directive as a step toward improving trust in elections and tightening citizenship verification for voters. The executive order indicated that states must uphold American elections according to federal laws designed to protect voting rights while preventing illegal activities, fraud, and other voting irregularities.

Casper is the second judge to invalidate parts of Trump’s executive order. In April 2025, U.S. District Judge Colleen Koller Kotelly blocked an order prompting federal officials to require citizenship proof for voter registration, asserting that the power to regulate federal elections lies with Congress and the states—not with the president. Casper’s ruling was broader, striking down additional provisions related to voting timelines, military and overseas voters, and federal funding.

As Republican legislators continue to advocate for the SAVE Act, which would mandate documentation of citizenship for federal voter registration, the plan’s status in the Senate appears uncertain despite the House’s approval earlier this year. President Trump remains a staunch supporter of the SAVE Act, indicating it’s a priority, and he suggests Senate Republicans might eliminate the filibuster to ensure it reaches his desk.

Now, the lingering question is whether the federal government can impose conditions on election-related funding for certain states. The judge has given both parties until July 10 to determine if they will proceed with further litigation on this claim.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comments.