A judge ruled that Trump cannot require proof of US citizenship on a federal voting form

NEW YORK (AP) — A federal judge ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s request to add documentary proof of citizenship requirements to a federal voter registration form cannot be enforced.

US District Judge Colleen Kollar Cutelli in Washington, D.C., sided with Democratic and civil rights groups that sued the Trump administration over his executive order to reform US elections.

Read more: Maine and Texas are the latest fronts in the voting battles, with voter ID and citizenship on the ballot

It ruled that the citizenship directive is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers, dealing a blow to the administration and its allies who have argued that such a mandate is necessary to restore public confidence that only Americans vote in U.S. elections.

“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for regulating elections to the states and Congress, this Court finds that the President lacks the authority to direct such changes,” Kollar-Kotely wrote in her opinion.

She further stressed that with regard to matters relating to determining voting qualifications and regulating federal election procedures, “the Constitution assigns no direct role to the President in either area.”

Kollar Koteli reiterated comments she made when she was granted a preliminary injunction on the case.

The ruling grants the plaintiffs partial summary judgment preventing the proof of citizenship requirement from taking effect. It says the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, which is considering adding this requirement to the federal voter form, is permanently barred from taking any action to do so.

In a statement, Sophia Lynn Lakin of the American Civil Liberties Union, one of the plaintiffs in the case, called the ruling “a clear victory for our democracy. President Trump’s attempt to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements on a federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab.”

A message seeking comment from the White House was not immediately responded to.

Although this is a top priority for Republicans, attempts to implement citizenship requirements for voting have been fraught with danger. The US House of Representatives passed a citizenship mandate last spring, but it stalled in the Senate, and numerous attempts to pass similar legislation in states have proven equally difficult.

Such requirements created problems and confusion for voters when they went into effect statewide. This presents particular hurdles for married women who have changed their names, because they may need to show birth certificates and marriage certificates in addition to government ID cards. These complications arose earlier this year when the citizenship proof requirement first went into effect during local elections in New Hampshire.

In Kansas, a citizenship requirement that was in place for three years created chaos before it was struck down in federal court. About 30,000 eligible people were prevented from registering to vote.

It also turns out that non-citizen voting is rare.

The lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee and various civil rights groups will continue to allow a judge to consider other challenges to Trump’s order. This includes a requirement that all mail-in ballots, rather than just postmarked, be received by Election Day.

Other lawsuits against Trump’s election executive order are ongoing.

In early April, 19 Democratic state attorneys general asked a separate federal court to dismiss Trump’s executive order. Washington and Oregon, where almost all voting is by mail-in ballots, followed suit of their own against the order.

Riccardi reported from Denver.