WASHINGTON\u00a0\u2014\u00a0President Trump has spent months waging an unusually aggressive campaign to reshape how states run elections, leveraging federal agencies in ways no previous president has attempted.<\/p>\n
He has pushed the Department of Homeland Security to compile a list of citizens in each state to help determine voter eligibility. He is seeking to give the Postal Service a role in deciding who can receive mail ballots. He has threatened to withhold federal funding from states<\/a> unless they phase out electronic voting machines. And he is pressuring Republican lawmakers to overhaul voting laws, claiming without evidence that elections are being rigged.<\/p>\n The efforts have run into resistance in court and within his own party. They have also left postal workers and local officials bracing for an election cycle marked by deepening doubts about voting integrity and uncertainty about how the federal government may challenge the election results.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s an unprecedented power grab to reshape how our elections work so that he and his allies can maintain and expand power,\u201d said Eric Kashdan, director of federal advocacy at the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan government ethics organization.<\/p>\n The White House defends the effort as fulfilling a campaign promise, and argues the administration is \u201clawfully enacting the agenda President Trump was elected to enact.\u201d<\/p>\n One of Trump\u2019s defining efforts to assert some federal control over state elections has been his insistence on passing the SAVE America Act, which would require voters to provide proof of citizenship when they register, require Americans to show identification when casting a ballot and require states to send voter data to the Department of Homeland Security. <\/p>\n His relentless push for the measure has prompted him to derail a bipartisan housing bill<\/a> and threaten to forgo signing any piece of legislation unless the voting measure is approved. He says he considers the matter a \u201cnational emergency.\u201d Despite the pressure campaign, Senate Republican leaders maintain there is not enough support to pass the measure.<\/p>\n The political stakes ahead of the midterms have been laid out more bluntly by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), whose chamber has approved the SAVE America Act. Last month, Johnson warned conservatives gathered at the Faith & Freedom Coalition that if Democrats win back control of the House, they will \u201cgo after the president\u2019s family, the cabinet, his donors, friends\u201d and supporters.<\/p>\n \u201cI run the protection program,\u201d Johnson said. \u201cI will take care of you.\u201d<\/p>\n Setbacks in court<\/p>\n The administration\u2019s ambitions have hit numerous snags in court in the last month, with judges reaffirming in many cases that the Constitution gives states \u2014 not the federal government \u2014 primary authority over elections.<\/p>\n In one case, U.S. District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan, who was appointed by President Biden, went further.<\/p>\n She said a federal immigration database the Department of Homeland Security was compiling to determine voter eligibility violated privacy laws. She added that the database has resulted in states actively removing U.S. citizens from voter rolls based on inaccurate information.<\/p>\n \u201cAll in all, the federal government has knowingly trampled on the privacy rights of American citizens in a manner that threatens the sacred right to vote,\u201d Sooknanan wrote.<\/a> \u201cThis Court cannot stand idly by while that happens.\u201d<\/p>\n James Percival, the general counsel for Homeland Security, said the ruling was the latest example of \u201chow hard the Left will fight to stop us from solving problems they insist do not exist.\u201d<\/p>\n The Supreme Court\u2019s conservative majority also dealt a blow to the GOP<\/a> last month and upheld state laws that allow for counting mail ballots that are postmarked by election day but arrive late.<\/p>\n The decision left Trump fuming. He said it was a \u201clittle bit surprising\u201d to see the court\u2019s decision, claiming without evidence that the result will inevitably give \u201cpeople more time to vote illegally.\u201d<\/p>\n Democrats, in turn, saw the ruling as a necessary check on the Trump administration\u2019s efforts.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile we continue to see unprecedented efforts to interfere with elections from the Trump administration, it is a relief to see federal courts make clear that these attacks on mail and absentee voting are clearly illegal and unconstitutional,\u201d Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) said in a statement after the ruling.<\/p>\n Trump is still eyeing changes to voting by mail. In March, he issued an executive order that seeks to limit who can receive mail ballots. Under the proposed rule, the Postal Service would not deliver mail ballots to states that don\u2019t turn over sensitive voter data to the federal government, Postmaster General David Steiner told a Senate panel<\/a> last month.<\/p>\n The admission drew immediate condemnation from Democratic lawmakers. They argued the regulation is an illegal attempt to coerce states into handing over their voter rolls.<\/p>\n \u201cPlease push back on being a pawn in this authoritarian playbook,\u201d Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) told Steiner. \u201cThe Postal Service is one of the most important institutions in our country. Don\u2019t taint it with the obsession of this one man.\u201d<\/p>\n A day after that back-and-forth, U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani, who was nominated by President Obama, blocked those plans \u2014 at least for now.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Constitution does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,\u201d the judge wrote<\/a>, while adding that the Postal Service does not have the legal authority to determine who can vote by mail and how.<\/p>\n The White House said Wednesday that the administration remains confident the executive order will be in place by the November election.<\/p>\n Taken together, the administration\u2019s efforts are unprecedented, UCLA law professor Rick Hasen said. That\u2019s because the Constitution puts control over elections in the hands of the states and grants Congress the ability to pass laws, he said.<\/p>\n \u201cThe president really only has authority through federal statutes that have already been passed,\u201d Hasen said. \u201cIt\u2019s not surprising that many courts have struck down or stopped him from doing things to try to interfere with how elections are being run.\u201d<\/p>\n Postal workers waiting for clarity<\/p>\n The legal setback for the Postal Service proposed rule was welcome news to the union representing postal workers.<\/p>\n \u201cWe believe that what we\u2019re being asked to do is in violation of the oath that we took,\u201d said Jonathan Smith, the president of the American Postal Workers Union, which represents more than 200,000 employees. <\/p>\n