Disability Voting News: March 26, 2025
Welcome to The Accessible Voting Booth for the week of March 26! This is going to be a long one this week on account of Trump’s new executive order on “Election Integrity,” so let’s get into it.
Trump Issues Executive Order Impacting Elections
Yesterday, President Trump issued an executive order on “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.” This is a broad Executive Order that is already being challenged by voting rights organizations as unconstitutional, arguing that it "attempts to wrap our state-run elections in massive federal government red tape, while handing Elon Musk the keys to sensitive state voter registration systems." Congress and the states have the authority to set rules for elections, but this Executive Order ignores that, claiming that states do not do enough to enforce provisions that prevent foreign nationals from registering to vote and that "the prior administration actively prevented States from removing aliens from their voter lists." Once again, noncitizen voting is already illegal and extremely rare, but let's not let facts get in the way of Trump's feelings. There is more in this Executive Order than I can cover, so I’ll link the unfortunate document for you to read in full. In my analysis below, I'm pulling some language from the Fact Sheet that the White House released along with the Executive Order yesterday.
Directs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and DOGE to review state voter rolls. The EO explicitly directs DHS and the DOGE Administrator to review states' voter registration lists and available records on voter list maintenance. It's not clear what this access would mean, how they would use this data, and whether it could mean potential voter roll purges. While they don't have the authority to kick voters off the rolls, DOGE has been abusing its power regularly.
Requires the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to require documentary proof of citizenship (DPOC) on voter registration forms. This Executive Order essentially tries to implement the SAVE Act without it being passed by Congress. As I’ve said in every newsletter since launching this just a few weeks ago, requiring DPOC will harm at least 21 million voters who don’t have access to these citizenship documents. The EO goes on to list acceptable DPOC as a U.S. passport, identification document compliant with requirements of the REAL ID Act of 2005 that indicates U.S. citizenship, a military ID card that indicates citizenship, and valid state or federal government-issued photo ID that indicates citizenship or is accompanied by proof of citizenship. I'm not clear on the REAL ID option: does this mean a REAL ID is acceptable proof of citizenship, or is a document that is acceptable for obtaining a REAL ID an acceptable proof of citizenship? Most state driver's licenses and REAL IDs do not indicate citizenship. Only 5 states offer enhanced IDs that indicate citizenship status.
Regardless of which documents are accepted, the people who will be most impacted by a DPOC requirement are young people and elderly people who are less likely to have ID, people who have changed their names from what appears on their birth certificate (including married people who adopted their spouse's name and trans people who have changed their names), and lower-income voters who cannot afford to obtain passports or citizenship documents. And as we saw in New Hampshire, which enacted a DPOC requirement this year, these laws are absolutely preventing citizens from registering to vote and casting a ballot.
Once again: the President does not have the authority to overhaul U.S. elections and dictate what is on voter registration forms, but clearly he isn't letting that stop him. The EAC was created by Congress and is not directly controlled by the White House, so it is unclear to what extent this order will be carried out, but as we’ve seen over the past several weeks, this Administration will continue to abuse its power to try to enforce these Executive Orders.
Requires federal agencies to provide states with access to federal databases to verify citizenship of voters and requires the Attorney General to prioritize prosecuting noncitizen voting. Many states are trying to pass DPOC laws that would require coordination with state agency databases to verify citizenship, and this would grant them access to federal databases. Prioritizing prosecuting noncitizen voting is, frankly, a waste of time—as it is exceptionally rare. I'm going to keep saying this.
Conditions federal election funds on states complying with DPOC requirements and other “election integrity measures,” including requiring DPOC on the national mail voter registration form. Courts have ruled that states are not allowed to require DPOC on the federal form with regard to Arizona’s HB 2492. Clearly, this Executive Order intends to address this issue and require DPOC for the national mail voter registration form, and it will try to penalize states that do not adopt DPOC requirements.
Calls for updates to the Voluntary Voting System Guidelines 2.0 (VVSG 2.0) and requires a voter-verifiable paper ballot record for voting systems. This particular provision will probably get some bipartisan support, as both Democrats and Republicans have called for voter-verifiable paper ballots. However, it negatively impacts access for voters with disabilities, overseas, and military voters in the few states that allow for these voters to receive and return a ballot online as an accommodation. It would also prevent other states from being able to adopt such systems for these voters.
Many organizations in the disability community have opposed paper ballot mandates. In a statement on the proposed For the People Act in 2021, 20 national disability rights organizations within the National Coalition for Accessible Voting (NCAV) expressed concerns for the bill's paper ballot mandate, citing the impact on remote voting and the stifling of innovation that could lead to production of a "fully accessible voting system that provides enhanced security without relying on paper." The statement goes on to say that "almost none of the [ballot-marking devices] currently used [in the polling place] are fully accessible for voters with disabilities, particularly those with blindness, low vision, or motor limitations who cannot independently visually verify or manually cast a paper printed ballot." They requested a carve out for voters with disabilities from the paper ballot mandate to ensure that voters with disabilities could maintain access to remote accessible ballot marking systems and called for greater research and development into accessible voting equipment. (Disclosure: I was employed by a member organization of NCAV at the time and was involved in drafting this statement).
The debate over election security and accessibility remains contentious. Security experts assert that electronic voting without a paper ballot can never be made fully secure. Accessibility experts assert that paper ballots can never be made fully accessible, as ballot-marking devices rely on visual verification and manual casting of the ballot, something that some voters with disabilities cannot do.
A paper ballot mandate itself likely wouldn't have a major impact on the voting equipment currently in use in the polling place, as 99 percent of all voters lived in a jurisdiction where they could cast a paper ballot in 2024, and only about 1.4 percent of voters lived in a jurisdiction still using direct recording electronic (DRE) voting machines. However, the Executive Order calls for the VVSG 2.0 be updated to ban barcodes and QR codes on paper ballots (except as necessary for accommodating voters with disabilities). I'll talk more about that in the next section:
Calls for voting equipment to be certified to the VVSG 2.0 and prioritizes funding to local and state agencies with compliant systems. The Executive Order gives jurisdictions 180 days to comply with this recommendation. As reported by Votebeat, the VVSG were updated last year to require paper ballots, but that doesn't include a ban on QR codes. As Votebeat reports, there are currently no voting machines on the market that are compliant with these standards, so meeting the 180-day deadline would be impossible. The Executive Order says that after the 180-day deadline, they will also review election systems to recertify to the new VVSG standards "and to rescind all previous certifications of voting equipment based on prior standards." Changes to voting equipment will most significantly impact access for voters with disabilities who need accessible equipment to vote privately and independently, especially if jurisdictions are not given enough time to select and obtain compliant voting systems.
The Attorney General shall take "appropriate" action against states that count ballots received after Election Day in federal elections, and federal election funding will be conditioned on compliance. In the 2024 General Election, 17 states and the District of Columbia allowed absentee or mail ballots to be postmarked by Election Day and required the ballot to be received by a date after Election Day. These states would be required to shift their absentee/mail ballot return deadlines.
All agencies must report on compliance with undoing Biden Executive Order 14019, “which turned Federal agencies into Democratic voter turnout centers,” according to the Fact Sheet. The clearly partisan wording in the Fact Sheet is disturbing. Beyond that, Executive Order 14019 increased access to voter registration and specifically addressed equal access for voters with disabilities by requiring the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to ensure that the online federal voter registration form was accessible, as well as to analyze barriers to voting for voters with disabilities, including in voter registration, technology, vote by mail, polling places, and poll worker training. I wouldn’t be surprised if my own work with NIST on poll worker training ends up being erased. When President Trump rescinded Executive Order 14019 in February, the National Coalition for Accessible Voting released a statement explaining how voters with disabilities are less likely to be registered to vote and calling on the federal government to restore the Executive Order's key provisions on government assistance with voter registration.
Overall, this Executive Order is an Executive Branch power grab that shares conspiracies of voter fraud and noncitizen voting that have been disproven time and time again, hands access to the voter rolls over to Elon Musk, attempts to install a nationwide documentary proof of citizenship requirement for voter registration, and rolls back progress made under the previous Administration to improve access to elections for marginalized voters, including voters with disabilities. The Administration makes no attempt to hide its clearly partisan intent by declaring that Biden's Executive Order on promoting access to voting "turned federal agencies into Democratic voter turnout centers" while at the same time arguing that the Biden Administration "prioritized political agendas over fair elections." It has significant negative implications for voters with disabilities.
I’ll end this section with a quote from President Trump taken directly from the Fact Sheet on the Executive Order: “We're going to fix our elections so that our elections are going to be honorable and honest and people leave and they know their vote is counted. We are going to have free and fair elections. And ideally, we go to paper ballots, same-day voting, proof of citizenship, very big, and voter ID, very simple.”
Good lord. We need a Cassie side eye for the ages for this one.
Federal Court Rules Texas SB 1 Violates Rights of Voters with Disabilities Under the ADA and Section 504 (via The Arc)
Okay, now let’s switch to some good news out of Texas. The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas declared that several portions of Texas’s SB 1 disenfranchise voters with disabilities. Judge Xavier Rodriguez found that the law violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. SB 1 was signed into law in 2021 as broad voter suppression legislation. The law created new burdensome identification requirements to vote by mail and created requirements for those assisting voters to swear under penalty of perjury before helping voters, putting assistors at risk of criminalization. As we know with all voter suppression legislation, those who are disproportionately at risk of being criminalized are Black and Brown people, and immigrants would also be at a higher risk, especially right now as the federal and many state governments target immigrants. This ruling builds upon a ruling from October 2024 which struck down disclosure requirements for people who are assisting voters.
I’m not a lawyer, so when it comes to understanding the court’s arguments, I’d prefer to quote the experts instead of trying to interpret the ruling myself. From The Arc’s press release: “The court found that, contrary to the state’s argument, voters with disabilities should not have to fight through unnecessary obstacles just to exercise their fundamental right to vote. Public entities have an affirmative obligation under the ADA and Section 504 to proactively ensure accessibility, rather than waiting for voters with disabilities to request accommodations. The ruling also emphasized the real harm caused by criminalizing voter assistance—an issue exacerbated by the ongoing crisis in the direct care workforce—and creating barriers to voting by mail.”
This fight is not over, as it is expected that Texas will appeal the ruling, but we’re still going to celebrate this victory. Congratulations and gratitude to The Arc of the United States, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF), Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., Houston Area Urban League, and law firms Arent Fox Schiff and Reed Smith which have been fighting against this restrictive legislation and for the rights of voters.
Oliver is here to put two paws up in celebration.
Texas Bill Would Require Driver’s License or State ID for Voter Registration (via Voting Rights Lab)
And now for some bad news out of Texas. On March 14th, Texas HB 1802 moved to the House Committee on Elections. This is my first time hearing of this legislation. Currently Texas, like other states, asks a voter to provide their driver’s license or state ID number to register to vote. If a voter doesn’t have a driver’s license or state ID, they can provide the last four digits of their Social Security number, and if they don’t have that, they can check a box stating that they don’t have any of these numbers. Texas HB 1802 would not only take away the option to register without these numbers–it would also take away the option to register using the last four digits of your Social Security number.
We already know that millions of Americans don’t have driver’s licenses or state IDs, because these are the types of IDs usually required by a restrictive voter ID law. In 2023, VoteRiders and the University of Maryland’s Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement analyzed data from the 2020 American National Election Studies and found that nearly 29 million voting-age U.S. citizens did not have a non-expired driver’s license and over 7 million did not have any other form of non-expired government-issued photo ID. Furthermore, they found that young people and voters of color were disproportionately less likely to have photo ID. 39 percent of 18 to 19 year olds did not have a driver’s license. While 2.3 percent of white non-Hispanic Americans did not have a voter ID, 6.2 percent of Black Americans, 6.1 percent of Hispanic Americans, and 4.5 percent of Indigenous Americans did not have a voter ID.
We also know that voter ID laws impact voters with disabilities, as Rutgers has found that 7.5 percent of people with disabilities do not have state-issued photo ID as compared to 4.8 percent of people without disabilities. Some people with disabilities are less likely to hold driver’s licenses due to the fact that they do not drive. Others may face greater access and transportation barriers to reaching a DMV to obtain a driver’s license. Many disabled people cannot afford accessible cars, vans, or modifications to vehicles that would enable them to drive.
Strict voter ID laws are a tried and true method of voter suppression that impacts marginalized voters the hardest. Not only are marginalized voters disproportionately less likely to obtain ID, but some states have gone further and limited voters’ options for obtaining ID. A year after Alabama passed a strict voter ID law in 2015, the state moved to close down 31 part-time “driver’s license offices” in a supposed effort to cut the state budget. The NAACP pressured the Governor to reverse this decision, and the Governor offered to reopen those offices–but only for one day a month.
If Texas HB 1802 passes, it will effectively place a strict voter ID law on voter registration. This is in the same vein as documentary proof of citizenship. HB 1802 is a dangerous attempt to limit who can register to vote.
Wisconsin Enacts Proof of Citizenship Bill (via The Markup)
On March 21, Wyoming enacted H 156, which creates a documentary proof of citizenship requirement (DPOC) for voter registration. According to the Voting Rights Lab, this is the first DPOC legislation enacted in 2025 of 18 states (as of my last count earlier this month) that are considering it. The bill requires voter registration applicants to present DPOC when applying to register to vote. Unlike some other laws I’ve read and covered, this does include a Wyoming driver’s license, state ID card, or REAL ID card from another state that does not indicate that the person is not a U.S. citizen. Many proposed DPOC laws I’ve read don’t include state IDs or driver’s licenses–some don’t list acceptable DPOC at all, but many others only allow for citizenship documents such as a U.S. passport, birth certificate, certificate of naturalization, or consular certificate of birth abroad by the Department of State. Wyoming’s law allows for individuals to submit these documents as well, along with a few other types of ID such as tribal ID. In addition, the law requires an individual to have resided in Wyoming for 30 days in order to vote in an election, which is the maximum residency requirement permitted by federal law.
You’re probably going to hear me talk about DPOC weekly because I do think this legislation is one of the biggest threats to voter access in 2025. It’s disappointing but not surprising that this law was enacted. As I’ve mentioned repeatedly over the past two newsletters, noncitizen voting is nearly nonexistent and we already have existing penalties for noncitizen voting. The intent of this legislation is to enact more barriers to voter registration. While a number of states are considering DPOC legislation, we also have to worry about HR 22, the SAVE Act (Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility) on the federal level, which if passed would enact a nationwide DPOC requirement.
Want to learn more about documentary proof of citizenship and the SAVE Act? Last week, Nonprofit Vote hosted a panel with The Brennan Center for Justice, Voting Rights Lab, and State Voices to talk about what you need to know about the SAVE Act and DPOC legislation. I also encourage you to call your Representative and ask them to oppose H.R. 22, the SAVE Act. You can also email your Representatives, and Nonprofit Vote has email templates to share with your network about the SAVE Act.
Idaho Extends Voter Registration Deadline (via The Markup)
On March 19, Idaho HB 278 was signed into law, extending the voter registration deadline by nearly two weeks. Previously, voters had until the 24th day before an election to register to vote, and now voters have until 5pm on the 11th day before an election to register. The bill also changed requirements for the start-of the in-person early voting period, allowing registrars to start the early voting period one week earlier.
Extending voter registration and expanding early voting is a win for voters, and especially voters with disabilities. Voters with disabilities experience greater challenges to registering to vote, such as encountering inaccessible voter registration websites or local election office websites. A 2024 evaluation of state election websites by QAwerk found that of the 42 states that offer online voter registration and the District of Columbia, only one state, North Carolina, offered the highest level of web accessibility for their voter registration website. Idaho scored 18th out of all 43 evaluated states and territories. Furthermore, QAWerk’s evaluation found that 77 percent of voter registration websites have form fields with missing labels, which make it difficult or impossible for screen reader users to fill out voter registration forms independently because their assistive technology can’t inform them of the purpose of the field. Other common access barriers included HTML errors, low-contrast text, and missing link descriptions.
When voters have more time to register to vote, they have more time to anticipate and navigate accessibility barriers like inaccessible voter registration websites. This is a win for Idahoans with disabilities!
Michigan GOP Lawmakers Challenge Voter-Approved Election Laws in Supreme Court (via Midland Daily News)
A dozen Republican lawmakers in Michigan have petitioned the Supreme Court to declare several voter-approved election laws passed in 2018 and 2022 unconstitutional. The laws they’re challenging include 2018 Proposal 3, which authorized automatic and Election Day voter registration, no-excuse absentee voting, and straight-ticket voting, options that greatly benefit voters with disabilities.
As I mentioned above, increasing access to voter registration benefits voters with disabilities, and no-excuse absentee voting does as well. Currently, Michigan allows any voter to vote by mail without a declared reason such as disability or being away from home on Election Day. Vote by mail is important for voters with disabilities because it extends options to those who cannot come to the polling place on Election Day for any reason, including a lack of access to transportation, illness, or having an inaccessible polling place. Michigan is one of 28 states that offer no-excuse absentee voting.
Although states that require an excuse include disability as a reason to vote absentee, requiring a reason to vote by mail is restrictive for many reasons. Voters may feel like they don’t qualify as “disabled enough” to vote absentee on the basis of disability. At least one state tightly controls whether voters with disabilities can receive an absentee ballot: Louisiana only allows voters with a “documented disability” to vote by mail, and voters must apply through a specific “Disabled Application” to receive an absentee ballot on the basis of disability. This means that election officials are given discretion over whether someone is “disabled enough” or has enough documentation to prove they are disabled.
The GOP lawmakers challenging Proposal 3 and other election laws are arguing that Governor Gretchen Whitmer and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson violated their constitutional rights by enforcing these ballot proposals. In 2023, these lawmakers filed suit in federal court and were dismissed for lack of standing, so now they are appealing to the Supreme Court.
If this case moves forward, I’m concerned about what it means on many fronts. The lawsuit argues that citizens don’t have a right to enact ballot initiatives that impact elections. If other states have enacted ballot initiatives related to the conduct of elections, they could be impacted as well.
Thank you for reading this week’s edition of The Accessible Voting Booth! I’ll be back next week with more updates. As always, if you’d like to support the newsletter and my work, here’s how:
If you or someone you know is looking to hire a disability civic engagement expert, please reach out! If they need communications or administrative support, please refer them to Landmark Virtual Assistance!
Leave me a tip. Thank you for supporting my work!
Head over to support Disability Victory and our work in 2025.
