News
Trump Is Trying to Gain More Power Over Elections. Is His Effort Legal?
President Trump pushed on Tuesday to hand the executive branch unprecedented influence over how federal elections are run, signing a far-reaching and legally dubious order to change U.S. voting rules.
The executive order, which seeks to require proof of citizenship to register to vote as well as the return of all mail ballots by Election Day, is an attempt to upend centuries of settled election law and federal-state relations.
The Constitution gives the president no explicit authority to regulate elections. Instead, it gives states the power to set the “times, places and manner” of elections, leaving them to decide the rules, oversee voting and try to prevent fraud. Congress can also pass election laws or override state legislation, as it did with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Yet Mr. Trump’s order, which follows a yearslong Republican push to tighten voting laws out of a false belief that the 2020 election was rigged, bypasses both the states and Congress. Republican lawmakers in Washington are trying to pass many of the same voting restrictions, but they are unlikely to make it through the Senate.
The order’s most eye-catching provisions are the requirements of proof of citizenship and the return of mail ballots by Election Day.
But the order, which threatens to withhold federal funding from states that do not comply with it, includes a range of other measures.
It seeks to give federal agencies, including the Elon Musk-led team known as the Department of Government Efficiency, access to state voter rolls to check “for consistency with federal requirements.” It aims to set new rules for election equipment, which could force states to replace voting machines that use bar codes or QR codes. And it instructs the U.S. attorney general to hunt for and prosecute election crimes.
Is this legal?
Probably not all of it, legal experts say — and voting rights groups and state attorneys general are already signaling that they will file challenges.
Several experts predicted that provisions of the order might well be found unlawful, though they said that others, like directions to Mr. Trump’s attorney general and other cabinet members, fell within legal bounds.
“It’s an attempt at a power grab,” said Richard L. Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Los Angeles. “The president has been seen in the past as having no role to play when it comes to the conduct of federal elections, and this attempt to assert authority over the conduct of federal elections would take power away from both an independent federal agency and from the states.”
What parts might be challenged?
A central question surrounds Mr. Trump’s attempt to use the Election Assistance Commission, a federal agency that Congress created in 2002 to help election officials with their work, to enforce the proof-of-citizenship requirement.
Currently, Americans may register to vote in federal elections either through their state or by using a federal form created by the E.A.C. The form includes a box that registrants check to attest, under penalty of perjury, that they are U.S. citizens, but it does not require documentation as proof.
The executive order would force the E.A.C. to change that process to require a passport, state identification that includes citizenship information or military identification.
Legal experts dispute that Mr. Trump has the authority to force the agency, which Congress designated as “independent” and which includes two commissioners from each party, to take any action.
“He can ask nicely,” said Justin Levitt, a professor of constitutional law at Loyola Marymount University who served in the Biden administration. “But he thinks he’s got a power that, at least so far, he does not have. It would take a change in the law and the Supreme Court affirmatively approving a radical expansion of power of the executive.”
Legal experts say the provision requiring all ballots to arrive by Election Day also probably exceeds the president’s legal authority, particularly the threat to withhold federal funding from those states that do not comply. (Seventeen states currently allow mail ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive soon afterward.)
“If the president is basically usurping the power of the purse by imposing limits on these grants that Congress itself did not impose, that could be the basis for constitutionally challenging these conditions,” said Laurence H. Tribe, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School.
Mr. Trump’s attempt to force states to turn over voter data to Mr. Musk’s team and federal agencies recalls a similar program from the first Trump administration, a commission on “election integrity” led by Kris Kobach, who is now the Kansas attorney general.
The commission sought data from all 50 states, but 44 of them refused to comply. The Republican secretary of state in Mississippi told the commission to “go jump in the Gulf of Mexico.”
What is the potential impact on voters and elections?
If the full order were to stand, it could potentially disenfranchise millions of Americans and cost state and local governments millions of dollars.
About 21.3 million people do not have proof of citizenship readily available, according to a 2023 study by the Brennan Center for Justice, a voting rights and democracy group. Nearly four million people do not have the documents at all because they were lost, destroyed or stolen. The executive order does not allow for birth certificates to prove citizenship.
It is also unclear whether women who have changed their surname after marriage will face new hurdles in proving their citizenship.
The order could also lead election officials to throw out sizable numbers of ballots that arrive after Election Day. For example, in Nevada’s two largest counties in the 2022 general election, about 45,000 ballots arrived after Election Day and were counted, according to state data. In Washington State, Kim Wyman, a Republican former secretary of state, estimated that “about a third of the ballots in any given election” arrived on the Wednesday or Thursday after Election Day.
The order could put states in deep budget holes, as well. Many states, including the battlegrounds of Georgia and Pennsylvania, use voting machines with bar codes or QR codes. Replacing them would cost millions of dollars that the order does not provide.
Republicans won in 2024. Why do they want to change voting laws?
Mr. Trump has made specious claims about voter fraud for decades, but since his 2020 election loss and the 2021 Capitol riot, he has pushed the issue to the center of Republican politics.
Even though voter fraud is exceedingly rare, nearly every speech of Mr. Trump’s 2024 campaign included false claims that noncitizens were voting in American elections. He also railed against mail voting, even as Republican groups successfully pushed more of the party’s voters to cast ballots that way.
Jason Snead, the executive director of the Honest Elections Project, a conservative advocacy group tied to the activist Leonard Leo, said the executive order was simply enforcing laws already passed by Congress. He referred to a ruling from a federal appeals court that found that Congress’s selection of a federal Election Day meant all voting must be completed by that day, with no late-arriving ballots permitted.
“The executive order is acting well within the four corners of those existing laws, so we’re not breaking new ground in terms of legal authority,” Mr. Snead said. “We’re not breaking new ground in terms of the relationship between the federal government and the states.”
Three San Francisco couples set out Monday for their annual road trip to Ashland, Ore., for the town’s famous Shakespeare festival. They drove separately and planned to meet at 6:30 p.m. on the terrace of their favorite Japanese restaurant there.
They had booked a table for six, but only four showed up for dinner.
Judith and Wylie Sheldon were found dead in their running car on the side of the road to Oregon, shocking their friends and family and leaving a hole in San Francisco’s arts and film world.
Ms. Sheldon, 84, was the daughter of William Wyler — who won three Oscars for best director — and chaired the board of the San Francisco Silent Film Festival. Mr. Sheldon, 86, was a prominent lawyer.
David Smith, who had befriended the couple more than 40 years ago, said in an interview that he and the others at the dinner table had grown nervous as time ticked on and their friends did not answer repeated calls to their cellphones. They learned they had not checked into their hotel either.
The friends eventually learned from one of the couple’s sons that the California Highway Patrol had found the couple at 5:46 p.m., both dead inside their running Jeep Compass. It was parked on the side of Interstate 5, north of Redding, Calif., more than 100 miles from their destination, the authorities said. Ms. Sheldon was driving, while Mr. Sheldon was in the passenger seat, according to the authorities.
The Redding area on Monday was under an extreme heat warning issued by the National Weather Service. Temperatures reached 109 degrees, according to the Weather Service.
Mr. Smith said he learned from the son that the couple had been found without any water or other liquids in the car. The fan was on high, but the air conditioning was not working, meaning they might have been blasted with hot air, Mr. Smith said. The windows were rolled down. The car had plenty of gas, and there were no signs of mechanical failure or foul play, Mr. Smith said the son told him.
“They didn’t crash. They stopped. They both just died there,” Mr. Smith said. “The entire thing is so bizarre. We’re still in a state of shock.”
The circumstances and cause of the couple’s death is under investigation but “appears to be medically related,” the Highway Patrol said in a statement.
Whether the heat contributed to the couple’s death “may be determined” by an autopsy, a spokesman for the Shasta County Sheriff’s Office said, adding that one had not been scheduled yet and could take several weeks to complete.
“We’ll just have to see,” the spokesman, Tim Mapes, said.
The Sheldons met at Stanford University and had two sons. They lived in a large home in San Francisco’s upscale Pacific Heights neighborhood that had views of the bay from the front and a garden out back.
They hosted many parties there on behalf of the San Francisco Silent Film Festival and sometimes let revelers pose for photos with Mr. Wyler’s Oscar statuettes. Ms. Sheldon fell in love with silent movies after first seeing those created by her father — before his better known blockbusters like “Ben-Hur” and “Roman Holiday” — only about 30 years ago, said Anita Monga, artistic director of the festival.
Stacey Wisnia, the festival’s executive director, said the couple was generous, delightful and unassuming.
Back in Ashland, Ore., Mr. Smith said the four remaining friends had distracted themselves from their grief by attending plays, including “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” and “Come From Away.” They were able to give away their friends’ tickets.
Ms. Monga had last seen Ms. Sheldon just last month at the film festival, which was held at the newly remade Castro Theater.
“This is such a shock,” Ms. Monga said of the deaths. “Also because it’s still a mystery.”
Luigi Mangione appears for a pretrial hearing at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York, June 17, 2026.
Angelina Katsanis/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Angelina Katsanis/AP
New York — In a dramatic reversal, Luigi Mangione’s legal team on Thursday backed away from a plan to use a psychiatric defense when his case goes to trial in state court in September. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to murdering health insurance CEO Brian Thompson in 2024 on a Manhattan street.
At a hearing only a day earlier before state Judge Gregory Carro, Mangione’s attorneys confirmed that Mangione had been undergoing psychiatric evaluation. They signaled that his defense would be based at least in part on the argument that Mangione was experiencing “extreme emotional disturbance.”
But in a one-line letter sent to Carro on Thursday, Mangione’s team said that “at this time” they no longer intend to introduce psychiatric evidence during the trial. It’s unclear what sparked the shift. Mangione’s team didn’t respond to NPR’s request for comment.
Former Manhattan prosecutor and legal analyst Gary Galperin told NPR it was a “stunning reversal” for Mangione to withdraw from the psychiatric defense. “One can only speculate at this point as to the reasons,” he said.
“What remains, of course, at this point is the question of what defense they will pursue at trial,” he added.
This maneuver came after Carro ordered Mangione’s attorneys to quickly share psychiatric information with prosecutors.
“They need to know what the malady is that this defendant suffers and how that triggered extreme emotional distress,” he said, during Wednesday’s hearing. “I’m not going to let you surprise people on the eve of trial. Get it done.”
Assistant Manhattan District Attorney Joel Seidemann repeatedly complained that Mangione’s team was “stonewalling” the prosecution by withholding medical information about his psychiatric state. “We have gotten nothing,” Seidemann said.
Mangione’s lead attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo denied her team was delaying the court process or improperly withholding information.
But legal analyst Richard Schoenstein says by withdrawing the psychiatric defense, Mangione’s team “is avoiding the court deadline to produce its psychiatric evidence.”
According to Schoenstein, this latest move “does not entirely foreclose” Mangione’s team from returning to some form of psychiatric argument during the trial, but he added that such a defense would now be far more difficult.
Mangione’s case has drawn worldwide attention. Legal experts say the 28-eight-year old has drawn an unusual level of public support because of his criticism of the health insurance industry. Thompson, a father of two, was CEO of UnitedHealthcare at the time of his murder.
During Wednesday’s hearing, Carro also indicated that a tranche of court documents would be made public that apparently relate to Mangione’s potential psychiatric defense. On Thursday, Carro reversed course.
In a signed order, he said that because Mangione will no longer present psychiatric evidence, “the court’s previous order sealing certain transcripts, emails, and documents, remains in effect.”
Mangione’s state trial is scheduled to begin in early September, with a federal trial expected to take place later.
The museums, designed by conservative nonprofits and Trump appointees, tell the story of early America, from colonization to revolution. The one exhibition looking beyond the early years is the “Wall of American Heroes.” It is a list of 51 people, chosen to illustrate 250 years of American history.
A White House spokesman said they were “individuals who shaped this nation’s history, culture and spirit across generations.”
The people pictured on this national honor roll — and the people left out — help illustrate what this administration sees as the highlights of American history.
Amid the administration’s efforts to reshape the nation’s relationship with its past, Trump appointees heavily weighted the list toward a single era of American history — and a few specific kinds of hero.
The other exhibitions in the Freedom Trucks were crafted by a pair of conservative nonprofits, PragerU and Hillsdale College. But the “Wall of American Heroes” was created by Freedom 250, a nonprofit effort whose leaders were chosen by President Trump and that was created to lead the planning of celebrations of the nation’s 250th birthday, overshadowing a bipartisan congressional commission.
A spokeswoman for Freedom 250 said Mr. Trump was not directly involved in the selection of those featured.
But the list clearly tracks Mr. Trump’s own lifetime and the heroes of the conservative political movement.
The wall’s tilt toward heroes of the baby boomer generation, for instance, extends beyond Hollywood stars and musicians. Of the four religious leaders on the list, two — Archbishop Fulton Sheen and the Rev. Billy Graham — also appeared on TV regularly in the 1950s and 1960s. The only painter on the list is Norman Rockwell, known for his idealized depictions of American life in that period.
By contrast, there is only a handful of figures from the first decades of American independence.
“That’s a disservice, if your intention is to present the last 250 years,” said Sarah Weicksel, the executive director of the American Historical Association. “Because all of the people on this list are building on the work and struggles and progress that was made by the people in the 150 years prior.”
The “Wall of American Heroes” was inspired by a similar display in a traveling museum created by the State of Virginia. But Virginia’s display celebrates little-known historical figures.
Mr. Trump’s, by and large, celebrates people who are already well-known — and, often, people who were famous in their own time. For example, it praises P.T. Barnum, a circus impresario who used hoaxes and freak shows to draw crowds. The wall calls him an “icon of American sensationalism.”
The spokeswoman for Freedom 250 said that many of the names on the wall were drawn from a list of 250 people that Mr. Trump wants to include in a “Garden of American Heroes” in Washington.
The spokeswoman declined to say what criteria were used to narrow down the list.
The only president whose name appears on the wall — not on the list of heroes, but alongside his quotation — is Mr. Trump himself.
Explore the Wall of Heroes
Navigate the display by dragging from side to side.
-
Fitness1 minute agoWhen is the best time to exercise in the heat?
-
Movie Reviews11 minutes ago‘Maa Inti Bangaram’ Movie Review: Samantha Rocks, Writing Suffers
-
World23 minutes agoUS tells ASML it is concerned China may have top chip tool, Bloomberg News reports
-
News26 minutes agoSan Francisco Film Patrons Are Found Dead on Side of Highway
-
Politics31 minutes agoVideo: Reflecting Pool Turns Green, Paint Peels After Renovation
-
Health46 minutes agoNew At-Home DNA Test Reveals if GLP-1 Weight-Loss Drugs Will Work for You
-
Lifestyle1 hour agoWhat does freedom actually look like? : It’s Been a Minute
-
Technology1 hour agoBarret Zoph is out at OpenAI again after just five months
