President Donald Trump’s recent executive order to overhaul U.S. election procedures has caused confusion among state and local election officials, raising fears of voter uncertainty leading up to the 2026 midterms. Amidst existing challenges such as the loss of federal cybersecurity support, officials now face the prospect of significant changes, including a new voter registration mandate, potential decertification of voting systems, and stricter ballot deadlines for many states.
In Connecticut, Secretary of State Stephanie Thomas remains optimistic that recently acquired ballot scanners worth $20 million will comply with the order, but expresses concern for other states. “States don’t have unlimited funds to upgrade election equipment frequently,” Thomas, a Democrat, remarked. “Imagine investing in new equipment only to find it unusable due to the order. There is no solution for that scenario.”
Given the likelihood of legal challenges against Trump’s order, the specific requirements and timelines remain uncertain, adding to the anxiety of election officials. “I’m clueless about the deadlines outlined in the order,” shared Joseph Kirk, an elections overseer in Bartow County, Georgia. “I hope for clarity soon because regardless of the outcome, I need to ensure voter needs are met.”
The executive order inserts the federal government into state election affairs. Trump’s order, issued on Tuesday, criticized the efforts of election officials nationwide while praising electoral practices in other countries. Trump’s ongoing skepticism towards U.S. election integrity, underscored by baseless claims following his 2016 win and 2020 loss, has stoked doubts. Despite numerous reviews confirming his defeat, Trump continues to allege electoral fraud.
The order, coupled with recent cuts to cybersecurity initiatives and funding for election resources, has sparked apprehensions regarding the federal government’s future role in elections. “While states oversee elections, federal support has been vital,” noted Larry Norden, an election security expert. “This partnership requires trust, consistency, and certainty, all of which have been disrupted in recent months.”
Among the notable changes mandated is the requirement for individuals to provide proof of U.S. citizenship during voter registration, a measure championed by Congressional Republicans.
Last year, at the urging of President Trump, House Republicans introduced the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, also known as the SAVE Act. However, the effort faced opposition from Democrats in the Senate, leading to its stall. House Republicans are now planning to revisit the bill, with a House committee scheduled to discuss it on Monday.
Following the executive order, several Republican state election officials praised provisions that require federal agencies to assist states in verifying voter eligibility and citizenship. Democratic officials, on the other hand, have expressed criticism of these provisions.
Concerns have been raised by voting rights groups regarding the citizenship requirement. They highlight issues such as limited access to birth certificates, the passport requirement for only about half of Americans, and challenges faced by married women who have changed their names.
While instances of noncitizens voting do occur, they are typically rare and often unintentional mistakes rather than deliberate attempts to influence elections. Voting illegally can lead to felony charges and deportation. Implementing the citizenship requirement would place a financial burden on election officials, with no additional federal funding available to support the process.
Experts warn that establishing the infrastructure needed to collect, store, and retrieve citizenship data in every state would be costly and complex. This could also lead to confusion among voters, particularly with the upcoming 2026 elections on the horizon.
The potential for legal battles and last-minute changes in voting requirements could further undermine voter confidence in the electoral process. Election officials stress the importance of clarity, planning, and proper equipment to ensure successful elections and maintain public trust.
Additionally, Trump’s order could necessitate changes in voting machines for some counties without providing additional financial assistance. The directive aims to restrict the use of barcode or QR code systems on ballots, potentially impacting counties’ voting systems without offering funding for necessary upgrades.
The order mandates the commission to review, recertify if necessary, and revoke all previous certifications of voting equipment based on outdated standards within 180 days. In addition to the legal aspects of the order, experts highlight that federal law specifies procedures and public comment periods for updating the standards. While some voting systems do not utilize barcodes, the process for states to transition to new equipment is time-consuming. Mark Lindeman, the policy and strategy director at Verified Voting, which specializes in election technology, explains that election offices need approval to invest in new voting systems, undergo a procurement process, wait for equipment to be delivered by manufacturers, and train staff on its usage. Lindeman also emphasizes the challenges states would face in procuring, obtaining, and testing new voting systems simultaneously, as manufacturers may not be able to supply the high demand.
