Vermont government, advocates push back – but can they force Trump to let United States Post Office mail the ballots?

By Guy Page

A new executive order from President Donald Trump aimed at tightening federal election procedures is drawing sharp criticism from voting rights advocates and state officials, who warn it could disrupt mail-in voting and shift control of elections away from the states.

The March 31 order, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” directs federal agencies to compile state-specific lists of verified U.S. citizens and requires the United States Postal Service to deliver absentee and mail-in ballots only to voters included on those lists.

Under the plan, the Postal Service would also be required to implement new tracking systems for ballots and ensure they are sent only to individuals enrolled on a government-managed participation list. The administration says the changes are intended to prevent non-citizens from voting and to strengthen confidence in election integrity.

The executive order further instructs federal officials to investigate and potentially prosecute election workers or entities that distribute ballots to ineligible voters, and it authorizes withholding federal funds from states that do not comply.

The order was executed after Congress failed to approve the SAVE Act, which among other provisions would have eliminated universal mailed ballots. No other nation allows governments to mail ballots to all voters, as do several U.S. states, including Vermont.

Supporters of the order argue that federal agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration, can help verify voter eligibility using existing databases.

However, critics say the proposal could effectively limit access to mail-in voting and create confusion ahead of upcoming elections.

In Vermont, Attorney General Charity Clark has joined a multistate lawsuit challenging the order, calling it unconstitutional.

“The Constitution makes clear that states have the power to run their own elections, and it does not authorize the President to interfere in state election administration,” Clark said in a statement. She warned the order could force states to overhaul their voting systems on short notice, risking “confusion, chaos, and distrust” while potentially disenfranchising eligible voters.

The League of Women Voters of Vermont also condemned the move, framing it as a threat to voter access.

“The League of Women Voters has always and will always stand unapologetically on the side of voters, particularly those who have been historically disenfranchised,” the organization said in a statement. “The administration’s latest executive order is a direct attack not only on voters, but on how elections are run in this country.”

The group, which typically leans Democrat on policy issues, added that the Constitution assigns election administration to the states, not the executive branch, and warned the order “expands the president’s power while narrowing voting to a select few.”

Legal experts and state officials involved in the lawsuit argue that requiring ballots to be sent only to federally approved lists could interfere with existing state voter registration systems and vote-by-mail programs, which vary widely across the country.

The coalition of states is asking a federal court to block implementation of the order before it can take effect, setting up what is likely to be a significant legal battle over the balance of power between federal and state governments in administering elections.

It is unclear how, or if, the Vermont Secretary of State’s Office would distribute ballots if Trump prohibits the Post Office from distributing them.