Story · June 13, 2025

Judge Blocks More of Trump’s Election Order, Pauses New Voting Rules

Court blocks additional provisions of Trump election order Confidence 5/5
★★★★☆Fuckup rating 4/5
Serious fuckup Ranked from 1 to 5 stars based on the scale of the screwup and fallout.
Correction: Correction: A June 13 federal court ruling in Massachusetts blocked additional parts of President Trump’s March 25 election executive order. An earlier April ruling in a separate Washington, D.C., case had already paused the proof-of-citizenship requirement.

A federal judge in Massachusetts on June 13, 2025, blocked additional parts of President Donald Trump’s executive order on elections, including provisions tied to documentary proof of citizenship and parts of the ballot-receipt rules. The order, signed March 25, was aimed at changing how federal elections are administered, but the court’s latest ruling did not shut down the entire directive. It stopped more provisions from taking effect while the legal fight continues. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/4f863aaa8e0c59640ebc727827ffc887?utm_source=openai))

The June ruling came after an earlier decision on April 24 had already barred the administration from immediately enforcing the proof-of-citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form. In that earlier order, the judge allowed other parts of the executive order to remain in place for the time being, including a move to tighten mail-ballot deadlines. The June 13 decision added another layer of limits, this time reaching more of the ballot-deadline and ballot-receipt framework challenged by Democratic state attorneys general. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/4b683fe2e1106316fdb05621be9b7d0e?utm_source=openai))

The cases center on a basic question of authority: how much election policy a president can change by executive order. Trump’s order sought to require documentary proof of citizenship for federal voter registration, direct agencies to enforce a stricter ballot-receipt standard, and tie some election-grant funding to compliance with the new rules. The states argued the directive exceeded presidential power and intruded on election administration that the Constitution leaves largely to states and Congress. The court accepted enough of that challenge to keep the disputed provisions on hold, at least for now. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/4f863aaa8e0c59640ebc727827ffc887?utm_source=openai))

The ruling does not end the dispute. It leaves the administration defending the order in court while separate injunctions continue to pick apart different pieces of the same effort. But on June 13, the practical result was clear: more of Trump’s election overhaul was blocked before it could be enforced nationwide. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/4f863aaa8e0c59640ebc727827ffc887?utm_source=openai))

Support the work

Help keep this site going

If this story was useful, help support The Daily Fuckup. Reader donations help pay for hosting, archives, publishing, email, and AI costs.

Donate

Read next

Reader action

What can you do about this?

Call or write your members of Congress and tell them the exact outcome you want. Ask for a written response and refer to the bill, hearing, committee fight, or vote tied to this story.

Timing: Before the next committee hearing or floor vote.

This card only appears on stories where there is a concrete, lawful, worthwhile step a reader can actually take.

Reader images

Upload a relevant meme, screenshot, or photo. Automatic review rejects spam, ads, and unrelated junk. The top-rated approved image becomes the story's main image.

Log in to upload and vote on story images.

No approved reader images yet. Be the first.

Comments

Threaded replies, voting, and reports are live. New users still go through screening on their first approved comments.

Log in to comment


No comments yet. Be the first reasonably on-topic person here.