Trump threatens to end mail-in voting. In one of his most controversial moves since returning to the White House, President Donald Trump announced that he plans to sign an executive order to eliminate mail-in voting in the United States. He claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed with him during a recent meeting in Alaska. The declaration has triggered immediate debate about constitutional limits, voter access, and the future of American democracy.
On August 18, 2025, Trump revealed his plan through a social media post and later repeated the statement in an interview. He promised to lead what he called a “movement to get rid of mail-in ballots” by executive action before the 2026 midterm elections. He argued that voting machines were unreliable, costly, and controversial, while paper ballots with special watermarks would restore “honesty” to the election process.
The timing of his announcement, just over a year before the midterms, has fueled speculation that the move is intended to influence upcoming elections. Mail-in ballots are widely used by Democratic-leaning voters, which critics say explains Trump’s determination to end them.
Trump added another controversial twist by saying that Putin himself agreed with his view on mail-in ballots. According to Trump, the Russian leader called the practice “rigged” and advised against it. Critics have seized on this claim as evidence that Trump is willing to align U.S. election policy with the opinion of a foreign leader who has long been accused of interfering in American elections.
While Trump’s supporters argue that he is simply highlighting international perspectives, opponents view the reference to Putin as undermining U.S. sovereignty and giving legitimacy to outside interference.
Legal experts immediately responded, pointing out that the U.S. Constitution places the power to regulate elections primarily in the hands of the states, with Congress holding secondary authority. The President has no power to unilaterally ban mail-in voting across the country.
Earlier in 2025, Trump signed an executive order that sought to restrict absentee ballots and require proof of citizenship for all voters. That order was quickly challenged in court and blocked. Experts say this new order, if issued, would face the same fate. Constitutional scholars argue that the President is deliberately testing the boundaries of executive power, even when the law clearly limits him.
Mail-in voting has been a feature of American elections for decades. It is especially important for overseas military personnel, rural voters, people with disabilities, and the elderly. During the COVID-19 pandemic, its use expanded significantly, giving millions of Americans a safe way to cast their ballots.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that mail-in voting is a source of fraud. However, dozens of courts, election officials, and even Trump’s own Justice Department during his first term found no evidence of widespread voter fraud tied to absentee ballots. In fact, studies show that voter fraud of any kind in the United States is extremely rare.
In his statement, Trump also claimed that the United States is the only country that uses mail-in voting, suggesting that others abandoned it due to fraud. This claim is false. More than 30 countries, including Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom, use mail-in voting as a secure and legitimate option.
The misinformation has further fueled criticism that Trump is intentionally misleading the public to justify his push for tighter control over voting.
Eliminating mail-in voting would have a profound impact on voter access. Millions of Americans rely on absentee ballots for practical reasons. Soldiers stationed overseas, students studying away from home, older citizens in nursing facilities, and rural voters who live far from polling stations would all face significant barriers if the system were abolished.
Voting rights advocates argue that banning mail-in ballots would amount to voter suppression, disproportionately affecting groups who already struggle to participate in elections. They also warn that limiting ballot access could reduce overall turnout and skew results toward Trump and his allies.
Critics say the timing of Trump’s announcement shows clear political motivation. By targeting mail-in voting ahead of the 2026 midterms, Trump may be trying to reduce Democratic participation. Absentee ballots have historically leaned more Democratic, particularly in states with large urban populations and among younger voters.
This tactic is part of a broader effort by Trump and some Republican lawmakers to reshape election rules. In addition to eliminating mail-in voting, Trump has also promoted redistricting strategies and opposed early voting measures. These moves are viewed as attempts to consolidate power and limit the opposition’s ability to compete fairly.
Democratic leaders and voting rights groups immediately condemned Trump’s proposal, calling it unconstitutional and undemocratic. They described it as a direct attack on the right to vote and an authoritarian attempt to cling to power. Many state election officials vowed to resist any attempt by the federal government to override their authority.
Republicans, meanwhile, have been divided. Some strongly support Trump’s position, echoing his claims that absentee ballots are a pathway to fraud. Others, particularly state-level officials who oversee elections, have expressed concerns that such a sweeping ban would cause chaos and uncertainty.
Most experts agree that Trump’s executive order, if issued, would be struck down in court. The U.S. legal system has repeatedly affirmed the authority of states to set their own election procedures, and federal courts have consistently rejected claims of widespread fraud.
Even if blocked, however, the executive order could serve Trump politically by energizing his supporters. He has frequently used disputes over election integrity as a rallying point to frame himself as the defender of “honest elections” against what he calls a corrupt establishment.
Beyond the legal and political debates, Trump’s threat raises larger concerns about the health of American democracy. By attacking a legitimate voting method used by millions, the President risks eroding public trust in the electoral system. His invocation of Putin’s agreement further muddies the waters by aligning U.S. election policy with the views of an authoritarian leader.
The danger, critics argue, is not only in the potential suppression of votes but also in the normalization of anti-democratic rhetoric. Each time Trump makes sweeping claims about fraud without evidence, it chips away at public confidence and creates confusion about the legitimacy of elections.
In the coming weeks, all eyes will be on the White House to see if Trump actually signs the executive order. State governments, advocacy groups, and legal organizations are already preparing for immediate legal challenges. Courts are likely to act quickly, given the potential disruption to the 2026 midterm elections.
Meanwhile, Democrats plan to use Trump’s remarks as a rallying cry to defend voting rights. They are expected to push for federal legislation that would protect mail-in voting and prevent executive overreach. Civil society organizations are also mobilizing to educate voters about their rights and prepare for possible confusion caused by Trump’s statements.
Trump’s threat to end mail-in voting through executive action has set off a fierce national debate. While the plan faces insurmountable constitutional obstacles, the political and social consequences are significant. By questioning the legitimacy of a widely used voting method, Trump risks undermining confidence in the democratic process.
At the same time, the controversy highlights the resilience of the American system. States, courts, and advocacy groups are prepared to defend the right to vote. The coming months will test not only the limits of executive power but also the strength of the nation’s commitment to fair and accessible elections.
Read Next – Trump LA National Guard Protests: A June to Remember
The University of Pittsburgh, commonly known as Pitt, has maintained its position as 32nd among…
Troy University has been recognized by U.S. News & World Report as one of the…
Salisbury University has recently been recognized as one of the best colleges in the United…
In a significant development, Hamas has announced that it will release all remaining hostages held…
In a recent statement, President Trump urged Israel to “immediately stop” bombing Gaza, emphasizing his…
U.S. financial markets experienced notable movements as Treasury yields ticked higher and crude oil prices…