Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has joined a group of attorneys general seeking to assist in the legal defense of a challenged Trump administration executive order involving voter roll management.
The executive order, issued by President Donald Trump on March 31, entitled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” requires federal agencies to compile a “State Citizenship List” to be sent to the chief election officer of each state. The list would detail individuals who are confirmed to be U.S. citizens, who will be over the age of 18 at the time of the upcoming federal elections, and who maintain residency in their respective states.
The order also mandates that the U.S. Postal Service develop rules for mail-in and absentee ballots to “protect the integrity of the mail as a medium for transmitting Federal election ballots and establish uniform standards for mail-in or absentee ballot services,” implemented through USPS.
USPS would only be able to send absentee ballots to voters on the approved lists.
Legal challenges against the order include suits from California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a roster of 22 additional state attorneys general, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the League of United Latin American Citizens and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, who have decried the order as unconstitutional.
Plaintiffs have argued the order would restrict mail-in ballot access and insert federal authorities into election administration, which the Constitution reserves for states and Congress.
Marshall and the coalition, meanwhile, have argued for the necessity of the proposed voter management initiatives and federal resources in guarding “the integrity of American elections.”
“California doesn’t want anyone checking their voter rolls—and that tells you everything you need to know,” Marshall said in a written statement on Thursday.
“Alabama didn’t sue to stop election security; we’re here to defend it. This coalition will not let activist lawsuits strip states of the tools they need to ensure that only lawful votes are counted,” the attorney general added.
“If successful, the lawsuits would derail an opportunity for states like Alabama to work with the federal government to ensure that voter rolls are accurate, secure, and up to date, and that only lawfully registered voters may vote in elections,” Marshall’s office wrote.
In their filing with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the coalition requests to intervene as defendants, similarly arguing the executive order’s importance to ensuring election security.
“Plaintiffs claim the EO represents a federal intrusion on state authority over elections, but the Intervener States see things differently,” the state attorneys general wrote. “The EO is an example of cooperative federalism, whereby the federal government is offering optional resources that all States can use to protect their elections. The Intervener States strongly oppose Plaintiffs’ attempt to deprive them of those resources.”
Trump’s executive order was met with swift opposition from voting rights organizations and Democratic lawmakers and leaders who have argued the mandate will not hold up in a court of law.
“Not only is his order unconstitutional, it’s unserious. This order will not stand. His attempts to silence us will only make us louder—with our voices and our votes,” NAACP President Derrick Johnson said following the executive order’s signing.
Alongside Alabama, the coalition, led by Missouri, was joined by the attorneys general of Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas.
