Twin Federal Court Rulings Kneecap Trump's Election Integrity Agenda

In back-to-back rulings this week, two federal judges dealt significant blows to separate pillars of President Trump's election-integrity agenda, concluding that both Executive Order 14248 ("Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections") and one of the initiative's principal implementation mechanisms ran afoul of federal law.

On Monday, D.C. District Court Judge Sparkle Sooknanan dismantled the administration's implementation of the expanded SAVE system, holding that it violates the Privacy Act, the Social Security Act, and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan blocked President Trump's SAVE citizenship verification system.

It appears she kept her Trinidadian citizenship and pledged renunciation only “if required by law.”

If judges can stop Presidents, they should not also be citizens of foreign nations. pic.twitter.com/nIRetph6a9
— Eric Schmitt (@Eric_Schmitt) June 23, 2026

Then, on Wednesday, Massachusetts District Court Judge Denise Casper largely invalidated key provisions of the EO itself, holding that the President exceeded his authority in attempting to reshape federal election law.

BREAKING: Boston-based federal judge Denise Casper (Obama appointee) has just issued a sweeping order that bans the Trump administration from implementing most of its federal voter ID executive orders, including a proof of citizenship requirement. Judge Casper concluded the… pic.twitter.com/jAMqNhLol0
— Bill Melugin (@BillMelugin_) June 24, 2026

President Trump Issues Executive Order on Election Integrity: What's in It?

How Did We Get Here?

In March 2025, President Trump issued EO 14248 addressing federal guidelines, testing, and certification for voting systems, as well as voter-registration and citizenship-verification measures. The order directed agencies to expand the SAVE database as part of his election-integrity initiative.

Both the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) responded by dramatically expanding the system. The new version authorized participating states to verify citizenship using:

Social Security numbers;
SSA records;
newly available records for natural-born citizens.

The D.C. Case

Voting-rights groups sued the administration, arguing that the agencies exceeded their statutory authority and violated federal privacy laws. Judge Sooknanan ruled that the agencies acted unlawfully and granted the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion while denying the administration's summary judgment motion and motion to dismiss (along with a motion to dismiss filed by the State of Texas). Her order vacates both agencies' 2025 System of Records Notices and the challenged SAVE modifications.

In her opinion, Sooknanan emphasized that Congress placed strict limits on the disclosure of Social Security records, noting that the Privacy Act limits agencies' ability to share personal information. The court found that DHS and SSA tried to create an entirely new information-sharing system without proper legal authority and that the agencies also failed to follow required administrative procedures before implementing the changes.

The administration argued that immigration statutes authorized the expanded data sharing and asserted that the EO simply implemented existing law, but the court disagreed, holding that those statutes do not override the Privacy Act, Social Security Act, and APA procedural requirements.

The kicker here isn't just voter registration. Ultimately, Sooknanan's decision limits agencies' ability to share massive federal databases and amounts to a major setback for a key piece of Trump's election-integrity initiative.

The Massachusetts Case

With Wednesday's decision, Judge Denise Casper delivered her own blow to the administration's election integrity efforts with a ruling blocking key portions of the EO itself.

Shortly after Trump issued the EO, a coalition of blue states sued to challenge it. Casper entered a preliminary injunction in June 2025, which the administration appealed to the 1st Circuit. That appeal remains pending. Meanwhile, at the District Court, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment.

Casper's ruling is actually a mixed bag, with neither side netting a complete win. She granted much of the states' motion but also granted portions of the administration's motion as well, rejecting some of the claims by Wisconsin and certain other states. The bottom line, though, is that Casper's ruling permanently blocks several of the challenged sections of the EO:

§2(a) — proof-of-citizenship requirements tied to the federal voter registration form. (Court says Congress — not the President — sets those requirements under the National Voter Registration Act.)
§3(d) — directives involving federal voter-registration procedures and information-sharing. (Court finds EO conflicts with the statutory scheme Congress enacted.)
§4(a) — provisions concerning election administration by federal agencies. (Court again concludes the President lacks unilateral authority.)
§§7(a) and 7(b) — only as to the "Ballot Receipt States." (These involve federal funding consequences tied to counting ballots received after Election Day. The court sides with those plaintiff states, but other states lose those claims because they lack standing.)

The crux of Casper's ruling is that the Constitution gives Congress primary authority over federal election rules. Thus, executive orders cannot rewrite statutes, and the President cannot impose additional voter-registration requirements beyond what Congress enacted.

The decision grants a declaratory judgment and permanently enjoins enforcement of the challenged provisions against the successful plaintiff states on the points outlined above.

Now What?

We can expect the administration to appeal both of these decisions, even while President Trump and congressional Republicans attempt to hash out passage of the SAVE America Act (which, in theory, could moot many of the statutory issues at the heart of both cases).

We'll be watching.

Editor's Note: Unelected federal judges are hijacking President Trump's agenda and insulting the will of the people.

Help us expose out-of-control judges dead set on halting President Trump's mandate for change. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.