Executive Order 14248, titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections,” introduces several measures aimed at enhancing the security and integrity of federal elections in the United States. Below is a summary of each section, along with its potential impact on U.S. elections:
Section 1: Purpose and Policy
Summary: This section highlights the necessity of enforcing election protections akin to those in other developed nations. Issues such as reliance on self-attestation for citizenship, varied voting methods leading to chain-of-custody problems, and the acceptance of late-arriving mail-in ballots. The policy asserts the need for free, fair, and honest elections, adherence to federal laws prohibiting non-citizen voting, and the maintenance of accurate voter registration lists.
Potential Impact: Emphasizing a uniform approach to election integrity will lead to more standardized and secure electoral processes across states. However, it may also create a scenario where the federal government overreaches into state-controlled election procedures.
Section 2: Enforcing the Citizenship Requirement for Federal Elections
Summary: Directs the Election Assistance Commission to amend the national mail voter registration form to require documentary proof of U.S. citizenship. Acceptable documents include passports, REAL ID-compliant identification, or military IDs. State or local officials must record details of the proof provided. Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security is instructed to provide state and local officials with access to systems for verifying the citizenship status of individuals registering to vote or already registered.
Potential Impact: Requiring documentary proof of citizenship aims to ensure that only eligible U.S. citizens register to vote, reducing instances and even the implication of non-citizen voting. Curiously this provision does not allow a state issued birth certificate to be used as proof of citizenship when registering with a federal form, likely because it would be beyond the scope of the EAC’s authority.
Section 3: Ensuring Compliance with Federal Law Regarding Election Day
Summary: Mandates that only mail-in ballots received by the close of polls on Election Day will be counted in federal elections, aligning with existing federal laws (2 U.S.C. § 7 and 3 U.S.C. § 1).
Potential Impact: Standardizing the deadline for mail-in ballots is a great way to expedite election results and reduce disputes over late-arriving ballots. Accepting ballots after the polls close on election day opens up the door to litigation and reduces overall confidence in the integrity of the election. Early voting and mail voting periods in all states provide a great allowance of leeway for voters who cannot get to the polls on election day.
Section 4: Maintenance of Accurate Statewide Voter Registration Lists
Summary: Requires states to maintain accurate and current statewide voter registration lists, as mandated by federal laws. The Department of Homeland Security is directed to share database information with states to assist in this effort.
Potential Impact: The primary mission of the Voter Reference Foundation is providing free access to the nations voter rolls and in turn enhancing the accuracy of voter rolls in order to promote transparency and integrity in the election process. We can unequivocally state that there is work that needs to be done to improve the accuracy of the voter rolls. It is our hope that this section of the order will help achieve that goal.
Section 5: Prohibition of Foreign Contributions and Expenditures
Summary: Reinforces the prohibition on foreign nationals participating in federal, state, or local elections by making contributions or expenditures, addressing concerns about foreign interference through conduit contributions and expenditures related to ballot initiatives.
Potential Impact: Strengthening prohibitions against foreign interference will safeguard the integrity of elections. Effective enforcement will enhance public confidence, the challenge will be monitoring and identifying covert foreign contributions that seek to undermine our elections.
Section 6: Implementation of Voter-Verified Paper Audit Trails
Summary: Emphasizes the need for voting methods that produce a voter-verifiable paper record to enhance the security and integrity of elections.
Potential Impact: Implementing paper audit trails can improve the transparency and reliability of elections, allowing for effective audits and recounts. Having a paper audit trail can greatly reduce the perception that tabulations and electronic voting machines could possibly be used to alter election results. However, for states that do not currently implement such systems and equipment, transitioning may require significant investment and training for election officials and will most certainly require further aid.
Section 7: Enforcement of Election Integrity Standards
Summary: Instructs the Attorney General to take necessary actions to enforce federal laws related to election integrity, including ensuring compliance with statutes that prohibit non-citizen voting and mandate the maintenance of accurate voter registration lists.
Potential Impact: Active enforcement of election laws deter fraudulent activities and promote fair elections. This comes at a cost however, this type of scrutiny from the federal government can lead to increased federal involvement in state-run elections, potentially causing a conflict centered around states’ rights if improperly implemented.
Section 8: Reporting Requirements
Summary: Requires federal agencies involved in election administration and enforcement to submit reports detailing their efforts to implement the provisions of this order, ensuring transparency and accountability.
Potential Impact: Regular reporting enhances oversight and public trust in the electoral process. Agencies are performing this work already, most of which has long been required by federal and state law, and they should be proud to share it with the country to help further increase trust in the election process. This has the potential to cause additional administrative burdens on agencies across the country, however most of the provisions in this order only reinforce already established law, so a failure to perform or report will highlight areas of failure.
Section 9: Severability
Summary: States that if any provision of the order is found to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in effect, preserving the order’s overall intent.
Potential Impact: Ensures that the executive order remains operative even if parts are legally challenged, maintaining the continuity of its enforceable provisions. This order is already facing many challenges with complaints and lawsuits challenging nearly every aspect of the order. Should any of the challenges be successful, it is important that other portions of this order remain intact.
Section 10: General Provisions
Summary: Clarifies that the order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations, and does not create any enforceable rights or benefits.
Potential Impact: Limits the scope of the order to existing legal frameworks and available resources, potentially constraining its implementation based on funding and legal interpretations.
Section 11: Effective Date
Summary: Specifies that the order takes effect immediately upon its signing on March 25, 2025.
Potential Impact: Immediate implementation underscores the urgency of the measures but may challenge states and agencies to comply promptly, especially if they require significant procedural changes.
In summary, while Executive Order 14248 aims to enhance election integrity through various measures, its implementation could have complex implications, including potential legal challenges and debates over federal versus state authority in election administration.
The implementation of Executive Order 14248 has sparked considerable controversy and legal challenges. Nineteen Democratic-led states have filed lawsuits arguing that the order infringes upon states’ constitutional authority to regulate elections and imposes undue restrictions that could disenfranchise voters. Critics continue to espouse the same tired arguments that we hear far too often, particularly a proof of citizenship requirement may prevent eligible voters lacking specific documentation from registering, or the strict mail-in ballot deadline could lead to votes being discarded, ignoring the fact that the majority of Americans overwhelmingly support such reforms. As legal proceedings continue, we will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this order, and its potential effects on upcoming elections.