Violating Voting Rights or Protecting Polls? Breaking Down the Executive Order to Restrict Mail-In Ballots

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

On March 31, 2026, President Donald Trump issued an executive order aimed at reshaping how mail-in voting is administered in federal elections. The order directs federal agencies to compile state-by-state lists of eligible voters and restricts mail-in ballots from being sent to voters who are not on those lists. The order has already been met with lawsuits, setting the stage for a broader debate over executive power and the federal government’s role in elections.

Understanding Absentee and Mail-In Voting

In the 2024 election, almost one third of all voters (nearly 48 million people) cast their ballot by mail, and 12 states including D.C. conducted their 2024 elections by mail-in ballot entirely. Absentee and mail-in voting are methods that let eligible voters cast their ballot without needing to be physically present at the polling site on Election Day.

Absentee voting systems require voters to request a ballot be delivered to them. Traditionally, absentee voting was intended for those who could not vote in person because of circumstances such as military service, illness, or travel. Today, some states still require that voters provide a valid excuse to vote absentee. However, many states simply allow any eligible voter to vote by mail without a specified reason.

Several states and D.C. have adopted all-mail voting systems, in which ballots are automatically sent to registered voters. Compared to in-person voting, the mail-in method was designed to increase accessibility and reduce barriers to civic participation. Critics of this method argue that mail-in voting increases voter fraud; however, studies have generally found cases of voter fraud to be rare.

What Does the Executive Order Do?

The executive order, entitled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” seeks to create federal citizenship databases, give the United States Postal System (USPS) authority over key aspects of mail-in voting, and increase the criminalization of certain practices related to election administration.

First, the executive order directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) to compile a list of people who are eligible to vote in each state.

Second, the order increases federal investigation and enforcement related to the administration of ballots. The EO directs the Attorney General to prioritize investigations of state and local election administrators if ballots are issued to people who are ineligible to vote. It also expands the potential criminal liability to those indirectly involved in ballot distribution by directing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to prioritize investigations of people and organizations involved in printing and distributing ballots to ineligible voters.

Third, the order gives the United States Postal Service (USPS) new power by directing it to create nationwide rules for the voting process, including designing new envelopes with unique tracking codes that allow USPS to monitor ballots’ movement. It also specifies the USPS should not deliver mail-in ballots from anyone not on the approved USPS state-specific participation lists, and requires the USPS to coordinate with the DOJ and postal inspectors on election mail investigations.

What is President Trump’s Reasoning?

After Donald Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election, Trump argued that the results were due to widespread election fraud and inaccuracy of ballot reporting. For several years, he has pushed for electoral reforms to combat potential electoral fraud and interference.

This EO is Trump’s second attempt to further regulate voting processes. The first attempt occurred in March 2025 when he issued an executive order entitled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” that sought to require voters to present proof of citizenship when registering and withhold funding from states who do not agree to add a proof of citizenship requirement on their forms. However, this order was overturned in court.

Backlash to the EO

In response to the EO, many groups have challenged Trump’s attempt to alter federal election procedures. They argue that mail-in voting is a crucial tool for expanding access to voting, and highlight the millions of people who depend on mail-in systems to cast their ballots. Critics also contend that the new lists could easily miss citizens who have recently moved to new states.

On June 2, 2026 a federal court heard arguments that challenged Trump’s March 31 EO. The lawsuit, filed by several voting rights groups and a coalition of 23 states and Washington D.C., argued that the order violates the Constitution and risks mass disenfranchisement of eligible voters.In their arguments, these organizations reference the elections clause of the Constitution, which leaves the power of establishing election rules to states and Congress, offering very little authority to the president.

Many voter rights groups have also argued that the EO is unconstitutional and an overreach of executive power.

Support for the EO

On the other side, there are many that are in favor of the president’s order, arguing it would allow for greater security in elections. In 2024, the House Republican Policy Committee published a policy paper arguing that no-excuse absentee and mail-in voting threatens election integrity and increases chances of voter fraud. During a hearing on May 28, a district court judge ruled that it is too early to hear the plaintiffs’ concerns or to deem the EO a risk to voting rights as it has yet to be implemented. Legislators who support the EO point to this ruling as an early success for their cause.

Future Outlook and Implications for Elections

Beyond the immediate effects, the executive order raises broader questions about presidential power and election conduct, and its significance is reflected by its circulation through different courts. In May, a federal court judge declined to block the executive order; however, this decision was appealed. On June 18, a federal judge ruled the plaintiffs were permitted to proceed with their lawsuit against the EO. The judge acknowledged the time-sensitive nature of this case as it would directly affect the November midterm elections. Ultimately, the debate over the order reflects dynamic challenges, balancing election security, voter accessibility, and limitations of government power.

Violating Voting Rights or Protecting Polls? Breaking Down the Executive Order to Restrict Mail-In Ballots was first published by ACE, and republished with permission.

Rachel Alexandre is a graduate of Stony Brook University's Honors College