A federal judge on Thursday blocked major components of President Donald Trump‘s sweeping executive order seeking to overhaul U.S. election procedures, ruling that his administration likely overstepped constitutional boundaries.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, appointed by GOP icon former President Ronald Reagan and elevated under former President Bill Clinton, issued a preliminary injunction halting provisions of the March executive order that would have added a proof-of-citizenship requirement to the National Mail Voter Registration Form.

The judge also froze efforts to require public assistance applicants to verify citizenship before accessing federal voter registration materials.

Why It Matters

Trump’s order, signed on March 25, tasked the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) with implementing changes that, critics argued, would disenfranchise millions of voters.

Voting rights organizations and Democratic groups immediately filed suit, arguing that the directive violated the Constitution’s Elections Clause, which grants states—not the federal executive—the authority to regulate elections.

What To Know

The decision represents a fresh setback for Trump, who has argued that the requirement is necessary to restore public confidence in elections.

In a 120-page ruling, the judge stated that the plaintiffs had demonstrated the proof-of-citizenship requirement would inflict irreparable harm on their clients and run counter to the public interest. Meanwhile, the government offered “almost no defense of the President’s order on the merits.”

“The President is free to express his views on the policies he believes should be considered,” Kollar-Kotelly wrote. “But here, he has issued an ‘Order’ directing an independent commission to ‘require’ changes in areas tightly regulated by Congress.”

The judge also struck down a portion of Trump’s executive order that would have required public assistance recipients to verify their citizenship before accessing the federal voter registration form.

The plaintiffs in the case included the League of Women Voters, League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the Democratic National Committee.

Trump’s administration argued that no harm had occurred because the provisions had not been enforced. During an April 17 court hearing, Trump attorney Michael Gates said a preliminary injunction wasn’t warranted because the order hadn’t been implemented, according to the Associated Press (AP).

The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division expressed disappointment with the ruling. “Few things are more sacred to a free society—or more essential to democracy—than the protection of its election systems,” said Harmeet Dhillon, assistant attorney general for civil rights.

But the judge allowed other aspects of Trump’s sweeping executive order on elections to proceed for now, including a directive to tighten mail-in ballot deadlines nationwide.

She also declined to block Trump’s directive opening certain databases to Elon Musk‘s Department of Government Efficiency, which seeks to examine state voter rolls for noncitizens. The judge said the Democrats‘ objections were either premature or better suited for state-level litigation.

What People Are Saying

Roman Palomares, national president of LULAC, told the AP: “Our democracy depends on all voters feeling confident that they can vote freely and that their vote will be counted accurately.”

What Happens Next

Trump has long spoken out on his worries and grievances about voter fraud, most notably after he lost the 2020 election to former President Joe Biden, when he repeatedly claimed the Democrats stole it. Trump’s legal team is likely to challenge the injunction in appellate court. If the appeals court rules differently, the blocked provisions could be temporarily reinstated.