A federal appeals court has allowed President Donald Trump’s election integrity executive order to remain in place, rejecting a Democratic-led effort to block the administration’s proposed voter verification measures.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday that Democratic officials and voting groups had not shown they faced immediate harm because federal agencies had not yet fully implemented the order.
A three-judge panel upheld a May 28 decision from U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, who rejected a request for a preliminary injunction against the order.
The judges concluded the challengers could not prove they had already suffered immediate harm because the agencies responsible for carrying out the order had not yet taken concrete steps to implement it.
The appeals court said the executive order itself does not automatically change election procedures and instead directs agencies to act only when possible and consistent with existing laws, including the Privacy Act of 1974.
The judges wrote that if federal agencies later implement the order in a way that violates federal law or the Constitution, challengers could return to court seeking relief.
Trump signed the executive order, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” on March 31.
The order directs federal agencies to work toward creating lists of voters confirmed to be U.S. citizens and instructs the Postal Service to develop procedures limiting mail ballot distribution to verified voters.
Under the order, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) would provide states with information intended to identify voters confirmed as U.S. citizens.
The directive also calls for the Postal Service to establish a process requiring voters to opt into state mail-in voting lists.
Democratic officials challenged the order, arguing the proposed verification requirements could create barriers for some eligible voters.
Supporters of the measure say the changes are intended to strengthen confidence in elections.
Opponents argued the order could exceed federal authority, while supporters maintain the federal government has a role in protecting election integrity.
The appeals panel compared the case to the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Trump v. New York, which involved a challenge to a Trump administration census policy.
In that case, the Supreme Court found the dispute was premature because the government’s proposed actions had not yet occurred, according to Courthouse News.
The D.C. Circuit said the current challenge similarly relied on predicted future actions rather than completed agency decisions.
The court noted that there are legal questions surrounding potential future implementation of the executive order but said those issues could not be fully considered until agencies take specific actions.
The judges also said the record in the case was limited because it remained at the preliminary stage of litigation.
The ruling came as the administration separately asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review another case involving the executive order.
A federal judge in Massachusetts previously blocked the order from affecting this year’s elections, ruling that it required states to alter election procedures before the election cycle.
A Boston-based appeals court later upheld that decision, according to the Associated Press.
The executive order followed congressional debate over the Safeguard American Eligibility Act, commonly known as the SAVE Act, which would have required additional documentation for some voter registrations.
The legislation stalled in the Senate after failing to gain enough support.
Trump has continued urging lawmakers to advance the measure, while some Republican senators have opposed eliminating the filibuster to pass it.
The D.C. Circuit’s decision does not resolve the broader legal questions surrounding Trump’s election order.
Instead, it allows challenges to proceed if federal agencies take specific steps to implement the directive in the future.
