Illegal immigrants. Campus terror supporters. Transgender women in womens’ sports, rest rooms and private spaces. Corruption.
I’m learning to love this brave new world of Democrats taking the “20” side of a raft of “80-20” issues.
And here might be another one: attorneys-general from 19 states are taking the Trump administration to court over his his “Voter ID” executive order, which mandates voter ID and officially bars foreign nationals from voting in US elections.
The order requires government-issued proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration in every state, directs the Attorney General to work with state election officials to address violations of the executive order, and conditions federal funding on whether or not states require voter ID.
Any guesses as to who governs those 19 states?
As to what the suit claims – well, you’re not new at this, are you?
“The Elections EO violates the Constitution. It interferes with States’ inherent sovereignty and their constitutional power to regulate the time, place, and manner of federal elections,” the lawsuit states.
“It also usurps Congress’s powers to legislate (under the Elections Clause) and to appropriate (under the Spending Clause) because Congress has not chosen to implement the changes the President seeks to impose by decree,” the lawsuit said. “The critical funds at issue have in large measure already been appropriated by Congress.”
Interestingly, the suit appears to make at least a subtle nod to the electoral mandate that led Trump and DOGE to DC:
According to the lawsuit, the attorneys general argue that the order “sows confusion and sets the stage for chaos,” as states will need to allocate staff and resources for new training, testing, voter education and coordination, or risk losing federal funding.
Democrat Attorneys General caring about hiring more staff? We truly live in an age of miracles.
But what does the executive order actually say?
The order requires government-issued proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration in every state, directs the Attorney General to work with state election officials to address violations of the executive order, and conditions federal funding on whether or not states require voter ID.
The suit would seem to ask the court to accept the preposterous idea the federal government doesn’t set standards for federa. elections held in states – like, you can’t discriminate based on race, ethnicity, religion or national origin, and have a legitiomate election, and if you try, you’re going to have feds breathing down your neck to fix it until your children or grandchildren are running your state election system.
Why, you might be forgiven for thinking there’s a pattern of behavior among Democrat politicians and executives to keep voter data nice and opaque, indecipherable and uncontrollable, and to find their sudden love of state control, er, expedient and transient.
But suddenly, politicians who’ve never met a federal regulation they don’t love – indeed, who sponsored a wave of astroturf “protests” last weekend to demand the Administration keep “Hands Off!” their beloved rules – are suddenly cheering for, er, freedom from federal control:
Donald Trump’s Executive Order to seize control of our elections, intimidate voters, and attack Americans’ right to vote is unconstitutional and undemocratic.
I’m suing to stop the President’s authoritarian power grab and protect people’s right to vote and our democracy.
— NY AG James (@NewYorkStateAG) April 3, 2025
I can’t wait for this suit to get to a good originalist judge, to litigate the entire idea of federal standards for state elections.
