US President Donald Trump has announced an executive order aimed at overhauling the voting system by mandating voter identification, restricting mail-in voting, and requiring paper ballots only. Trump has long criticized the country’s election system, alleging it is susceptible to fraud and that his 2020 loss to Joe Biden was due to widespread irregularities. The proposed changes, which include eliminating most mail-in voting and enforcing strict identification requirements, have sparked significant debate. Critics argue that such measures could disenfranchise millions of eligible voters, particularly those without immediate access to proof of citizenship. While Trump claims the order is being crafted by leading legal experts, opponents question whether he has the constitutional authority to enact such sweeping changes, as federal elections are primarily managed at the state level.
Trump’s announcement, made via his social media platform Truth Social, signals an intent to dismantle the existing vote-by-mail system, with only a few exceptions permitted for those who are very ill or serving in the military. The president has previously stated that the executive order is being developed by the country’s best legal minds, but its practical implementation remains uncertain. Voting rights organizations have expressed concerns that the measures could disproportionately impact marginalized communities, particularly those without easy access to government-issued identification. The Brennan Center for Justice, among other groups, has highlighted that approximately 21.3 million people, or about 9% of U.S. voting-age citizens, do not have readily available proof of citizenship.
Legal experts and opponents of the plan argue that the president’s authority to unilaterally alter the election system is limited, given that states have the primary responsibility for administering elections. Critics have accused Trump of overstepping his constitutional powers, as federal law does not grant the president explicit authority to mandate such sweeping changes. The move has been met with skepticism, with some legal analysts questioning the viability of enforcing these measures without state cooperation. As the debate continues, the potential impact on voter access and the integrity of future elections remains a focal point of political discourse in the United States.