U.S. District Judge Denise J. Casper has struck down key parts of President Donald Trump's election integrity executive order, sparking a warning from the White House Deputy Chief of Staff about the judiciary's course.
The judge ruled that major sections of Trump's March 25, 2025, executive order exceeded presidential authority and violated the Constitution's separation of powers. Casper found that the order went beyond enforcing existing law and instead attempted to create or change election rules on its own.
Casper declared that sections of the order were "unconstitutional and void because they are ultra vires and violate the separation of powers under the United States Constitution." The ruling permanently blocks the administration from implementing provisions that would have required documentary proof of citizenship on the federal voter registration form, altered voting requirements for military and overseas voters, and threatened to withhold federal election-related funding from states that refused to adopt certain election rules.
In response, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller posted a warning about the judiciary's course, referencing Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts. Miller's statement echoed broader conservative criticism that the Supreme Court has not moved aggressively enough to curb lower-court rulings blocking Trump administration policies.
The lawsuit was brought by 19 states challenging the order and was heard in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. California Attorney General Rob Bonta hailed the ruling as a victory for the states, stating that the court ruled that every provision challenged in the Executive Order is unlawful.
Casper's ruling comes as Republican lawmakers continue pushing the SAVE Act, legislation that would require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections. The House passed a version of the measure earlier this year, but the proposal faces an uncertain path in the Senate.
The only issue left concerns whether the federal government can attach conditions to election-related funding for certain states. The judge gave the parties until July 10 to decide whether to continue litigating that claim.
