Proof of citizenship requirements
The executive order directs the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC), within 30 days, to update the national mail voter registration form and require registrants using the federal form to provide proof of citizenship documentation. Note: as of April 24, 2025, this section of the order has been preliminarily enjoined by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. This means that the EAC may not take any action to modify the national mail voter registration form to require documentary proof of citizenship until further action by the court.
The EAC is an independent federal agency and although it is part of the executive branch, it operates independently of presidential control. Congress included the national mail voter registration form as a provision of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, often known as Motor Voter. The form must be made available in all states that were not exempt from the NVRA. Idaho, Minnesota, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming are exempt because they either had no registration or Election Day registration at the time the NVRA was passed. There is an existing process through the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) for updating or adding information to the national mail voter registration form. The APA requires a minimum of 30 days for public comment after publishing proposed changes in the Federal Register and the executive order does not address these requirements.
The order also requires election officials accepting the national mail registration form to record what type of documentary proof of citizenship was provided and its issuance and expiration date. These extra data points that election officials would need to collect are not standard in existing voter registration databases and adding them would represent an additional cost for states.
The nuts and bolts of voter registration and proof of eligibility have always been the type of time, place and manner regulations the Constitution delegates primarily to state legislatures. Congress is considering the SAVE Act, which would require applicants to provide proof of registration. The SAVE Act must follow the legislative process and will have hearings and votes in each chamber. As of April 21, 2025, it has passed the U.S. House and has not yet been considered in the Senate.
The SAVE Act differs from the executive order in that it outlines specific acceptable documents including a birth certificate, which is not contemplated in the order. The order does allow REAL ID and military ID as proof of citizenship if they indicate that the applicant is a citizen of the United States, which most do not. REAL ID is a set of minimum standards for driver’s licenses and identification cards but indicate lawful presence in the United States, not necessarily citizenship. The SAVE Act also provides guidance to states on implementing the requirement and a process for those without documentary proof, which is not included in the executive order.
States are also considering ways to verify the citizenship of voter registrants. State legislation on proof of citizenship requirements typically specifies acceptable documents, such as birth certificates, which are not expressly listed in the order. States often outline alternative processes for voters who cannot provide the requested documentation as well. States have existing methods to match data with state-based databases to confirm citizenship and state legislation on this topic is informed by existing processes within a state. States are actively acting, both legislatively and administratively, to improve the process of verifying citizenship information on voter rolls.
Most states also have state-specific voter registration forms outlining voter eligibility requirements, which can vary. All states require registrants to be U.S. citizens and 18 years old to vote in state and federal elections, but there are variations in other requirements such as how long an applicant has resided in the state and whether a younger applicant can “pre-register” before turning 18. These state-based forms would not be impacted by the order.
The order directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure state and local election officials have free access to systems that help verify the citizenship of those already on the voter rolls. This presumably includes the Systematic Alien Verification Entitlements (SAVE) system, which is currently used by about a dozen states for this purpose. The system was not built for verifying citizenship for voter registration and states report that it is expensive and cumbersome to use. In February 2025 several Republican Secretaries of State sent a letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem to request improvements to the system to make it easier to use for this purpose. On April 22, 2025, Secretary Kristi Noem announced changes to SAVE to eliminate fees, streamline mass status checks and integrate other data points.
Review state voter registration lists
The executive order requires DHS, in coordination with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) administrator, to review each state’s publicly available voter lists and available records concerning voter list maintenance activities for consistency with federal requirements. Every state has laws outlining what information is publicly available, and in many cases this information is limited to members of political parties and campaigns, for the purposes of campaigning for office. States also limit the personal information of voters contained on this list to protect the privacy of U.S. citizens. Federal agencies and states seeking to implement the order may face questions regarding whether publicly available voter information is detailed enough to identify potentially ineligible voters, since different or additional information may be required to accurately compare names against other datasets.
Require all absentee/mail ballots to be received by Election Day
The executive order requires all ballots to be received on Election Day and all electors selected on Election Day. In other words, it would eliminate mail/absentee ballots received after Election Day regardless of postmark. This provision of the EO would preempt policies established in nearly half the states.
Currently 17 states accept ballots received after Election Day, but postmarked before, and will count these ballots and include them in the final tally. These are ballots that were sent before Election Day, as evidenced by a postmark, but since mail takes a few days they were not received by election officials until after Election Day. States that permit these ballots to be counted set a deadline by which they must be received, and the ballots are counted during the canvass and certification process, just like provisional ballots or other absentee/mail ballots where voters had to provide additional evidence of eligibility after Election Day. More than half of the states also count ballots from military and overseas voters that were sent before Election Day but received after, since these voters often experience mail delays.
Amend the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines
The executive order directs the EAC to amend the latest version of the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines (VVSG) to prohibit voting systems that use bar codes or QR codes in the vote counting process and require voting systems to provide a voter-verified paper record. The EAC approves the VVSG, which states can choose to use when setting requirements for machines used to cast and tabulate votes in the state. The latest set of guidelines, VVSG 2.0, were approved in 2021 through a process established by the Help America Vote Act that uses stakeholder advisory groups and public input. Federal voting system guidelines are voluntary, so the extent to which states rely on them varies. States also set their own voting system requirements that fit the methods of voting permitted by state law and preferences of voters in their own states.
Voting systems in use today overwhelmingly provide a voter-verified paper record (an estimated 95% of counties). Several voting system manufacturers market equipment that uses bar codes or QR codes for tabulation. Voting equipment is purchased at the county or local level, or sometimes at the state level, creating significant variation in the type of equipment used nationwide.
According to the nonpartisan organization Verified Voting, which tracks voting equipment usage, “Currently, 1,954 counties spread across 40 states use voting machines that encode votes in QR or barcodes.” Verified Voting explains that these machines are used for voters with disabilities in some states and for all voters in others. Prohibiting bar or QR codes constitutes an unfunded federal mandate of unknown proportions, as states could no longer use their current voting systems.
The order also requires the EAC to review and if necessary rescind the certification and then re-certify voting systems to meet the requirements in the order. Because it takes time for new voting systems to be built to new standards, and time for those systems to be tested, certified and made available to states and local jurisdictions for purchase, there are currently no systems available that have been certified to VVSG 2.0. Developing voting systems that meet the order’s no-bar-code requirements would take additional time.
Once voting technology that complies with VVSG 2.0 and the Executive Order exists, many states would need to replace their voting systems. This will be a multi-million dollar undertaking and an unfunded federal mandate. New voting systems are one of the costliest purchases for state and local election officials—many start planning to pay for new systems years in advance. Once states have the money on hand, the purchasing process itself can take several months.
The order does not provide federal funding for new systems. States will begin holding primary elections for the 2026 midterms in mid-2026, compressing the available timeframe to develop the technology and allocate state funding considerably. The last time the federal government required a shift in the type of technology used by states was through the 2002 Help America Vote Act, which provided billions of dollars for states to replace outdated equipment and gave them several years to do so.
The executive order also requires the EAC to rescind all certifications based on prior VVSG standards. No existing voting systems are certified to VVSG 2.0 yet, so the implication of this requirement—and whether it would require all existing voting systems to be decertified—is unclear. Many state laws currently refer to older standards and federal voting system requirements are interpreted in different ways, so the number of states that would need to replace all voting systems is unclear. Around three-quarters of the states make some reference to federal standards, testing by a federally accredited laboratory or federal certification in their election laws. The order does not mention whether it intends the EAC to use the existing decertification process outlined in its Testing and Certification Program; if so, it takes time.
Federal funding
The executive order directs the EAC to withhold federal funding from states that do not comply with federal law, including the order’s documentary proof of U.S. citizenship requirements. The order also directs the EAC to consider whether a state certifies voting systems to VVSG 2.0 and the extent to which states use the federal certification program when allocating Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Election Security Grant Funding. These provisions of the order are being challenged in court and may be ruled unconstitutional. Currently, the DHS administers the State and Local Cybersecurity Grant Program which addresses cybersecurity risks and threats to state and local government IT infrastructure. This grant will expire on Sept. 30, 2025, and has not yet been reauthorized with additional funding.
The Executive Order also requires the U.S. attorney general to enter into information-sharing agreements with states to identify election process violations, including election fraud, false information on voter registration forms and intimidation or threats to voters or election officials. States that are unwilling to enter into such agreements may be reviewed for potential withholding of grants or funds from the Department of Justice for law enforcement more widely, something that states rely on to fund state and local law enforcement activities including hiring police officers and state reentry programs.
The order does not direct any federal funds to states to implement its requirements. States will have to allocate their own funds to comply with the changes the order requires them to make.
Other provisions in the executive order
- Requires the heads of federal executive departments or agencies to assess citizenship before providing voter registration forms to those enrolling in public assistance programs. Note: as of April 24, 2025, this section of the order has been preliminarily enjoined by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The heads of executive departments or federal agencies providing public assistance programs may not withhold a federal voter registration form to any applicant based on an inability to “assess citizenship.”
- Directs the U.S. attorney general to prioritize the enforcement of laws restricting non-citizens from voting and to coordinate with state attorneys general to prosecute noncitizens who register or vote.
- Directs the commissioner of social security to make data available to states to assist in making voter eligibility determinations. The social security administration has worked with states to help maintain their voter lists since the passage of the Help American Vote Act in 2002.
- Requires the secretary of defense to update the form used by military and overseas citizens to register to vote and request an absentee ballot to require these citizens to provide proof of citizenship and eligibility to vote. Providing this information could be particularly difficult for those stationed overseas, who may not have immediate access to documents proving citizenship.
- Prohibits noncitizens from being involved in the administration of any federal election, including by accessing ballots, election equipment or other relevant materials.
- Directs the EAC and DHS to assess the security of all electronic systems used in the voter registration and voting process, particularly the extent to which systems may be connected to the internet and other cybersecurity risks. The Cybersecurity Infrastructure and Security Agency within DHS has historically provided election cybersecurity resources to states. In light of recent funding and staffing changes, the agency’s future role in these efforts is uncertain.
- Directs the attorney general to prioritize enforcement of laws prohibiting foreign nationals from making political contributions in U.S. elections.
- Directs the attorney general to prioritize enforcement of laws prohibiting lobbying by entities that receive federal funds.