Trump has signaled a sweeping shift on election rules, saying he will issue an executive order to require voter identification for all U.S. elections and to prohibit voting by mail except for those who are very ill or serving in the military.
In a post on Truth Social on Saturday night, the former president wrote, “Voter I.D. Must Be Part of Every Single Vote. NO EXCEPTIONS! I Will Be Doing An Executive Order To That End!!!” He also indicated support for banning mail voting except in limited circumstances.
Constitutional and congressional context remains central to the debate. The U.S. Constitution assigns primary authority to regulate elections to the states, with Congress empowered to enact federal election laws; there is no explicit grant of presidential authority over how people vote.
Trump’s stance on voting reform is linked to ongoing claims about the 2020 election. He has previously asserted that the election was stolen from him and has argued in various forums that the United States is unique in its use of mail-in voting. By contrast, many other countries permit some form of mail-in voting.
What is known about the current landscape of mail voting and voter ID:
– In the 2024 elections, 14 states and Washington, D.C., had turnout by mail exceeding 30 percent, with Trump winning half of those states. Utah, in particular, reported a 91.5 percent mail turnout, in elections overseen by Republicans.
– About 36 states have laws requiring or requesting identification at the polls; other states and the District use alternative identity verification methods.
– Voter fraud remains described as rare, and many researchers and advocates note that stringent voter ID laws can disproportionately affect minorities, low-income individuals, disabled voters, seniors, and students. The Brennan Center for Justice has highlighted that as many as 11 percent of eligible voters do not have the ID required by strict ID laws, with higher proportions among certain groups.
Legal and political context:
– A separate effort by Trump to require proof of citizenship to vote was blocked by a federal judge in June 2025, with the court noting the risk of disenfranchising millions who lack passports, lack ready access to birth certificates, or have name changes that complicate citizenship documentation.
– Enforcing strict ID or citizenship requirements could affect tens of millions of Americans who vote when they register or update their registration each election cycle. The article notes that 146 million American citizens do not have a U.S. passport.
What experts and observers are saying:
– The proposal to mandate ID for all elections and to curb mail voting is likely to face extensive legal challenges on constitutional grounds, as well as arguments about access to the ballot and potential impacts on turnout.
– Supporters argue that stronger ID and limited mail voting could bolster election integrity and public trust.
– Critics warn that such measures may suppress participation among marginalized groups and could complicate the process for first-time voters or those updating registrations.
Summary: Trump’s proposed executive order represents a dramatic expansion of efforts to tighten election access through voter ID and to limit mail voting, raising immediate questions about constitutional authority, potential legal battles, and the practical impact on turnout and how elections are administered. The debate sits at the intersection of election security, access, and the balance of federal and state powers.
Additional comments and context:
– If courts challenge the order successfully or if states push back, the actual implementation could hinge on a mix of federal rulings and state-level actions, making the policy landscape highly unsettled in the near term.
– For voters, the key takeaway is to stay informed about both federal statements and state requirements, as the rules governing voter identification and mail voting vary widely by state and can change with court decisions and new legislation.
Positive note: Proponents on one side emphasize the goal of strengthening trust in the electoral system, while opponents highlight the importance of ensuring broad and equitable access to the ballot. In any outcome, the year ahead is likely to bring renewed focus on how elections are administered and who is able to participate.