Nonprofit groups and Democrats sue Trump administration over election executive order

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump's executive order seeking to overhaul the nation's elections faced its first legal challenges Monday as the Democratic National Committee and a pair of nonprofits filed two separate lawsuits calling it unconstitutional.

The Campaign Legal Center and the State Democracy Defenders Fund brought the first lawsuit Monday afternoon. The DNC, the Democratic Governors Association, and Senate and House Democratic leaders followed soon after with a complaint of their own.

Both lawsuits filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ask the court to block Trump’s order and declare it illegal.

“The president’s executive order is an unlawful action that threatens to uproot our tried-and-tested election systems and silence potentially millions of Americans,” said Danielle Lang, senior director of voting rights at the D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center. “It is simply not within the president’s authority to set election rules by executive decree, especially when they would restrict access to voting in this way.”

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The legal challenges had been expected after election lawyers warned some of Trump's demands in the order, including a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration and new ballot deadline rules, may violate the U.S. Constitution.

The order also asserts power that legal experts say the president doesn't have over an independent agency. That agency, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, sets voluntary voting system guidelines and maintains the federal voter registration form.

The suits come as Congress is considering codifying a proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration into law, and as Trump has promised more actions related to elections in the coming weeks.

Both the legal challenges draw attention to the Constitution's “ Elections Clause,” which says states — not the president — get to decide the “times, places and manner” of how elections are run. That section of the Constitution also gives Congress the power to “make or alter” election regulations, at least for federal office, but it doesn’t mention any presidential authority over election administration.

“The Constitution is clear: States set their own rules of the road when it comes to elections, and only Congress has the power to override these laws with respect to federal elections,” said Lang, calling the executive order an “unconstitutional executive overreach.”

The lawsuits also argue the president's order could disenfranchise voters. The nonprofits' lawsuit names three voter advocacy organizations as plaintiffs that they allege are harmed by Trump's executive order: the League of United Latin American Citizens, the Secure Families Initiative and the Arizona Students’ Association.

The DNC's lawsuit highlights the role of the government's controversial cost-cutting arm, the Department of Government Efficiency.

It alleges the order's data-sharing requirements, including instructing DOGE to cross-reference federal data with state voter lists, violate Democrats' privacy rights and increase the risk that they will be harassed “based on false suspicions that they are not qualified to vote.”

“This executive order is an unconstitutional power grab from Donald Trump that attacks vote by mail, gives DOGE sensitive personal information and makes it harder for states to run their own free and fair elections," reads a statement from the plaintiffs.

Trump, one of the top spreaders of election falsehoods, has argued this executive order will secure the vote against illegal voting by noncitizens. Multiple studies and investigations in individual states have shown that noncitizens casting ballots in federal elections, already a felony, is exceedingly rare.

Monday's lawsuits against Trump's elections order could be followed by more challenges. Other voting rights advocates, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have said they're considering legal action. Several Democratic state attorneys general have said they are looking closely at the order and suspect it is illegal.

Meanwhile, 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 give them access to federal data to better maintain their voter rolls.

If courts determine the order can stand, the changes Trump wants are likely to cause some headaches for both election administrators and voters. State election officials, who already have lost some federal cybersecurity assistance, would have to spend time and money to comply with the order, including potentially buying new voting systems and educating voters of the rules.

The proof-of-citizenship requirement also could cause confusion or voter disenfranchisement because millions of eligible voting-age Americans do not have the proper documents readily available. In Kansas, which had a proof-of-citizenship requirement for three years before it was overturned, the state's own expert estimated that almost all the roughly 30,000 people who were prevented from registering to vote during the time it was in effect were U.S. citizens who had been eligible.

Monday's lawsuits are the latest of numerous efforts to fight the flurry of executive actions Trump has taken during the first months of his second term. Federal judges have partially or fully blocked many of them, including efforts to restrict birthright citizenship, ban transgender people from military service and curb diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives among federal contractors and grant recipients.

The Associated Press receives support from several private foundations to enhance its explanatory coverage of elections and democracy. See more about the AP’s democracy initiative here. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

New voting tabulators are pictured at the Registrars of Voters Office, Thursday, March 27, 2025, in Vernon, Conn. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)

Christopher Prue, president of the Registrars of Voters Association of Connecticut, right, moves new voting tabulators out of his office at the Registrars of Voters to be redistributed to other towns, Thursday, March 27, 2025, in Vernon, Conn. (AP Photo/Jessica Hill)

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops says it is ending a half-century of partnerships with the federal government to serve refugees and children, saying the “heartbreaking” decision follows the Trump administration’s abrupt halt to funding for refugee resettlement.

The break will inevitably result in fewer services than what Catholic agencies were able to offer in the past to the needy, the bishops said.

“As a national effort, we simply cannot sustain the work on our own at current levels or in current form,” said Archbishop Timothy Broglio, president of the USCCB. “We will work to identify alternative means of support for the people the federal government has already admitted to these programs. We ask your prayers for the many staff and refugees impacted.”

The decision means the bishops won’t be renewing existing agreements with the federal government, the bishops said. The announcement did not say how long current agreements were scheduled to last.

Catholic bishops sued President Donald Trump's administration in February over its abrupt halt to the funding of aid provided to newly arrived refugees, saying they are owed millions already allocated by Congress to carry out resettlement aid under agreement with the federal government.

But a federal judge ruled that he couldn’t order the government to pay money due on a contract, saying a contractual dispute belongs before the Court of Federal Claims. The bishops have appealed that ruling.

Beyond that specific funding dispute is the Trump administration’s halt to all new refugee arrivals. The Catholic bishops oversaw one of 10 national agencies, most of them faith-based, which contracted with the federal government to resettle refugees who come to the U.S. legally after being vetted and approved by the federal government.

Broglio’s announcement didn’t specify what the children’s services program was.

The bishops have overseen Catholic agencies resettling displaced people for a century. In recent decades they had done so in a partnership with the U.S. government, receiving grants that covered much, though not all, of the expenses.

The Trump administration’s “decision to reduce these programs drastically forces us to reconsider the best way to serve the needs of our brothers and sisters seeking safe harbor from violence and persecution,” said Broglio, who heads the Archdiocese for the Military Services, USA.

The announcement did not specify whether the cuts would lead to any layoffs, though Broglio asked for prayers for the “many staff and refugees impacted.”

Vice President JD Vance, a Catholic convert, accused the bishops conference in January of resettling immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally in order to get millions in federal funding — an apparent reference to the resettlement program, which actually involves legally approved refugees.

The bishops noted that rather than making money on the program, they receive less in federal aid than the programs cost and need to supplement the funding with charitable dollars.

Vance followed up his criticisms by appealing to Catholic teaching as justifying immigration restrictions. That drew rejoinders not only from U.S. bishops but an implicit rebuke from Pope Francis, who said Christian charity requires helping those in need, not just those in one’s closest circles.

Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

Catholic bishops lead a march in solidarity with migrants, Monday, March 24, 2025, in downtown El Paso, Texas. (AP Photo/Andres Leighton)