Attorney General Ellison files lawsuit against Trump Administration over unlawful executive order seeking to impose sweeping voting restrictions

Multi-state lawsuit asserts that voting restrictions are not authorized by U.S. Constitution or Congress

AG Ellison: 'Allowing Trump to take over our elections is like picking an arsonist to serve as our fire chief'

April 3, 2025 (SAINT PAUL)  — Attorney General Ellison today joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general in filing a lawsuit against President Donald J. Trump, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, the federal Election Assistance Commission, and other Trump Administration officials over Executive Order No. 14248 (the Elections Executive Order), an unconstitutional, antidemocratic, and un-American attempt to impose sweeping voting restrictions across the country. 

Among other things, the Elections Executive Order attempts to conscript State election officials in the President’s campaign to impose documentary proof of citizenship requirements when Americans seek to register to vote. It also threatens to withhold federal funding Congress allocated to States to assist with administering elections. This includes funding provided by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which has provided over $17 million to Minnesota.

The President has no constitutional power to rewrite State election laws by decree, nor does the President have the authority to modify the rules Congress has created for elections. The coalition’s lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, explains that the power to regulate elections is reserved to the States and Congress, and that therefore, the Elections Executive Order is ultra vires, beyond the scope of presidential power, and violative of the separation of powers. The attorneys general ask the court to block the challenged provisions of the Elections Executive Order and declare them unconstitutional and void.

"Elections in Minnesota are already fair and secure,” said Minnesota Attorney General Ellison. “The burdensome voter registration requirements this executive order seeks to impose would not make elections more secure; they would instead make it harder for Minnesotans to actually cast their ballots. This executive order is an unlawful attempt by the Trump Administration to take over significant parts of how Minnesota runs our elections, so I am challenging it in court. Given Trump’s attempt to overturn a free and fair election in 2020 because he did not like the result, allowing Trump to take over our elections would be akin to appointing an arsonist to serve as our fire chief.”

"The President’s executive order is unconstitutional and oversteps his authority. I am grateful to Attorney General Ellison and his colleagues from across the country for taking legal action to prove this point," said Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon. "If allowed to go into effect, this order would at best upend our election system and leave Americans currently registered to vote scrambling to catch up to these new restrictive requirements to vote. At worst, it would disenfranchise millions of eligible Americans who may not readily have access to the necessary documentation required."

In their lawsuit, the attorneys general assert that provisions of the Elections Executive Order will cause imminent and irreparable harm to the States if they are not enjoined. The challenged provisions include:

• Forcing the Election Assistance Commission (the Commission) to require documentary proof of citizenship on the Federal mail registration form (the Federal Form). The Commission is an independent, bipartisan, four-member body established by Congress. It is responsible for developing the Federal Form, in consultation with the chief election officers of the States, for the registration of voters for elections for Federal office. In their lawsuit, the attorneys general underscore that Congress has never required documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote using the Federal Form. 
• Commanding the head of each state-designated Federal voter registration agency to immediately begin “assess[ing] citizenship prior to providing a Federal voter registration form to enrollees of public assistance programs.” This aspect of the Elections Executive Order commandeers State agencies and their personnel, forcing States to participate in the President’s unlawful and unnecessary agenda. 
• Requiring military and overseas voters to submit documentary proof of citizenship and eligibility to vote in state elections. The Federal Post Card Application form is used by voters in the military or living abroad to register to vote in federal elections. Federal law unequivocally grants them the ability to register and cast a ballot “in the last place in which the person was domiciled before leaving the United States” — there is no requirement that this form demand documentary proof of citizenship or proof of current eligibility to vote in a particular state.
• Threatening to withhold various streams of federal funding to the States for purported noncompliance with the challenged provisions. In so doing, the Elections Executive Order seeks to control Plaintiff States’ exercise of their sovereign powers through raw Executive domination, contrary to the U.S. Constitution and its underlying principles of federalism and the separation of powers. 

In filing today’s lawsuit, Attorney General Ellison joins the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin. The litigation was led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford.