RNC: Democrats Want to Gut Voter Safeguards

RNC Chair Joe Gruters said Tuesday the Republican National Committee is backing the Michigan GOP's amicus brief in support of President Donald Trump's sweeping election-integrity executive order, accusing Democrats of trying to "eradicate commonsense safeguards" like voter ID, mail-in ballot standards, and clean voter rolls.

Gruters, in an RNC statement to Newsmax, framed the dispute as a battle over fundamental security in U.S. elections.

"Democrats are fighting to eradicate commonsense safeguards, like voter ID, mail-in ballot protections, and clean voter rolls – that keep our elections secure," he said. "President Trump's Executive Order protects our elections by enforcing existing laws and ensuring that only citizens can register and cast ballots. The RNC is proud to support the Michigan GOP's amicus brief as a part of our election integrity efforts."

That brief, financed by the RNC, is part of a broader fight over the administration's Executive Order 14248, Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections, which was issued in March.

The order imposes several contested provisions: it requires proof of citizenship to register to vote, mandates that mail-in ballots arrive by Election Day, and directs states to clean their voter rolls.

But the plan has drawn fierce legal backlash. In League of Women Voters v. Trump, civil rights groups argue the order exceeds presidential authority and violates federal law. In April, a federal judge blocked the order's requirement for documentary proof of citizenship on the federal voter registration form while litigation proceeds.

Meanwhile, a coalition of 19 Democrat state attorneys general has sued the administration, claiming the order usurps authority reserved for Congress and the states. The plaintiffs and lower courts also challenged the limits on late-arriving mail ballots and the order's push to purge voter rolls, arguing that these actions may disenfranchise eligible voters.

A judge in D.C. has since ordered the administration to respond to interrogatories about how the order is being implemented.

Supporters like Gruters frame the order as enforcing existing election laws and closing loopholes. Critics counter that it expands executive overreach into state-managed election procedures and could place undue burdens on voters.

With the Supreme Court's decision in Trump v. CASA limiting the power of universal injunctions against federal actions, future litigation may hinge on how courts balance national election rules with state autonomy.

As the case unfolds, the RNC's involvement signals escalating partisanship in what is likely to be a landmark legal battle over the boundaries of presidential power in shaping election policy.

• RNC Targets Hawaii in Voter Roll Battle
• GOP: Democrats Cultivate Extremist Discourse