President Trump asserted on Truth Social that states serve as federal ‘agents’ in election administration, claiming they ‘must do what the Federal Government… tells them’ for the country’s good. This accompanies his planned executive order to eliminate mail-in voting and voting machines nationwide.
Trump made these declarations on August 18, 2025, through his Truth Social platform, targeting election procedures across all 50 states. His statement specifically addresses vote counting and tabulation processes currently managed at state level.
The core constitutional conflict arises from Article I, Section 4, which grants states power to set election rules, with Congress holding limited override authority. Trump’s claim of presidential power to command states represents unprecedented federal overreach according to legal experts, including conservative constitutional scholars.
This stance starkly contradicts the 2016 Republican Party platform that dedicated an entire section to states’ rights, stating federal overreach constitutes ‘an assault on the liberties of individual Americans.’ Trump’s position also reverses his previous advocacy for state autonomy in voter ID laws, immigration enforcement, and healthcare programs.
Immediate reactions include bipartisan constitutional concerns and legal challenges. Former Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill (R) emphasized elections remain ‘state’s rights’ explicitly protected by the Constitution. Multiple states are preparing lawsuits should the executive order be issued.
Beyond elections, this continues Trump’s pattern of challenging state autonomy – including deploying troops against gubernatorial consent, federalizing DC police, and threatening funding over transgender policies. Legal scholars warn this erodes foundational federalist principles.
Next steps involve inevitable court battles over the proposed executive order’s constitutionality. The administration faces potential injunctions similar to previous blocked attempts to impose voting restrictions. State legislatures are mobilizing bipartisan resistance to protect election authority.