Trump says he will issue executive order to get voter-ID requirements before midterms
Last edited Fri Feb 13, 2026, 08:51 PM - Edit history (2)
Source: CNBC
Published Fri, Feb 13 2026 4:51 PM EST Updated 2 Hours Ago
President Donald Trump on Friday said he will issue an executive order "shortly" laying out the "legal reasons" for national voter-identification requirements. Trump, in posts late Friday to Truth Social, said he wants voter-ID laws implemented for the 2026 midterm elections, even though legislation mandating them appears poised to stall in Congress.
"The Democrats refuse to vote for Voter I.D., or Citizenship. The reason is very simple -- They want to continue to cheat in Elections," Trump posted to Truth Social.
"This was not what our Founders desired. I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future. There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!" he continued.
In a second post, published minutes after the first, Trump said, "If we can't get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted. I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order."
Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/02/13/trump-congress-voter-id-midterms.html
Article updated.
Previous article/headline -
Published Fri, Feb 13 2026 4:51 PM EST Updated 8 Min Ago
President Donald Trump on Friday said he will "shortly" issue an executive order laying out the "legal reasons" for national voter-identification requirements.
Trump, in posts late Friday to Truth Social, said he wants voter-ID laws implemented for the 2026 midterm elections, even though legislation mandating them appears poised to stall in Congress.
"The Democrats refuse to vote for Voter I.D., or Citizenship. The reason is very simple -- They want to continue to cheat in Elections," Trump posted to Truth Social.
"This was not what our Founders desired. I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future. There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!" he continued.
This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
Lovie777
(22,354 posts)Its time to resign.
Lithos
(26,612 posts)It provides a shield for Red/Purple states like Texas to crack down on voter suppression.
L-
Bluetus
(2,515 posts)An Executive order cannot create or change law, and it cannot compel action that is contrary to law.
An EO is simply that, an order to EXECUTIVE BRANCH EMPLOYEES about how they should conduct their job. It has no weight on anybody or any entity that is not directly in the President's chain of command. It cannot direct corporations to do anything. It cannot direct states to do anything. It cannot direct individuals to do anything. And it cannot direct Exec Branch employees to do anything that is against the law or outside their legal authority.
So PLEASE, I beg everyone, if you make a post about one of Trump's bullshit EOs, please take an extra 30 seconds to explain what EOs are and what they are not.
chouchou
(2,966 posts)Roy Rolling
(7,538 posts)The president cant demand the retirees at my polling station do sh*t. Fu*k him.

Bluetus
(2,515 posts)Above all else, an EO cannot direct any judge to do anything, and the EO cannot direct any legislator to do anything. That's called separation of powers.
MacKasey
(1,506 posts)quakerboy
(14,792 posts)And they have a highly funded, rapidly growing, personally loyal, legally unaccountable paramilitary force with no compunction against killing citizens for no reason.
Constitutions only work if they are upheld. Ours appears to be dead paper with a reputation rather than a relevant living doccument at this point.
Barring some change, this will get a lot uglier, probably soon.
BlueKota
(5,166 posts)rule it's constitutional even though it's not? It wouldn't be the first time they ruled against actual Constitutional law, for their orange deity.
livetohike
(24,134 posts)Justice matters.
(9,572 posts)it doesn't work like that, he would have made the EO already.
But like stated above, red states could take the bait and pass laws that require a photo ID to vote, but they are red states anyway.
OTOH, blue states will ignore his shenanigan, which will allow him to claim it was rigged.
wcmagumba
(5,866 posts)twodogsbarking
(18,054 posts)bluestarone
(21,712 posts)BULLSHIT!! He has NO AUTHORITY to do any of this. My biggest concern is ICE and how THEY could destroy our midterm election. SCARY days ahead.
onenote
(46,077 posts)The chances Trump wrote that are approximately 0.0 percent.
paleotn
(21,882 posts)Fiendish Thingy
(22,524 posts)The states will ignore his EO, just like they ignored all the others.
msongs
(73,302 posts)register, mostly for proof of residency. I dont recall having to show ID at the voting place. there is a huge vote by mail turnout here
BumRushDaShow
(167,460 posts)we only need to show an ID if voting "in person" for the very first time and/or if changing voting division due to a move, and voting in that polling place for the first time. If requesting an absentee ballot (either "no excuse" or as a regular absentee), then some kind of ID verification is required (driver's license number or last 4 digits of SS#) to apply for a ballot.
After that when voting, no ID is needed and the voter still needed to sign-in before voting (I'm guessing with signature check as I stopped doing in person during the pandemic in 2020 and haven't done in person since). I know they updated to using the electronic poll books after I stopped in-person voting and I think that is how people now sign in (used to be big binders with pages of names and a line to sign).
LetMyPeopleVote
(177,211 posts)trump cannot change state election laws by executive order. The last election executive order was struck down. trump needs for congress to act which is NOT going to happen
Link to tweet
https://www.democracydocket.com/news-alerts/trump-there-will-be-voter-i-d-for-the-midterm-elections-whether-approved-by-congress-or-not/
The Framers of our Constitution recognized that power over election rules could be abused, either to destroy the national government or to disempower the people from acting as a check on their elected representatives, Kollar-Kotelly wrote. Accordingly, they entrusted this power to the parts of our government that they believed would be most responsive to the will of the people: first to the States, and then, in some instances, to Congress.
The idea that immigrants are being brought into the United States to vote is a far-right conspiracy theory that has been repeatedly disproven. It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote, and those that do so intentionally are easily caught, prosecuted, imprisoned for years, and then deported, all for the chance to cast a single ballot out of hundreds of thousands. Consequently, noncitizen voting is exceptionally rare, as election officials and court findings across the country have persistently shown.
Similarly, mail-in ballots are popular across the country and have shown no evidence of being particularly susceptible to electoral fraud. The SAVE America Act would not limit mail-in ballots, but another bill recently introduced in the House, the Make Elections Great Again Act, would.
LetMyPeopleVote
(177,211 posts)Puppyjive
(959 posts)Trump and MAGA are the cheaters
JohnnyRingo
(20,672 posts)I read a newspaper every day. No one uses that name, or Dept of War.
No mention of how he's going to enforce it in blue states.
Polybius
(21,652 posts)I just checked Google Maps.
LymphocyteLover
(9,604 posts)pazzyanne
(6,753 posts)JohnnyRingo
(20,672 posts)Sure, they could grow a backbone and spit in his eye, but they might not like the consequences.
AP and Reuters have a 1st amendment shield around them, but Google is a business, and yes, they probably are close to a monopoly. They can temporarily appease him and continue to enjoy that advantage.
It's too bad when companies knuckle under for him, and it certainly frustrates that he can influence them, but he's the president that breaks things.
It seems like their cooperation is half hearted anyway. I searched Gulf of America:
[img]
[/img]
ChicagoTeamster
(640 posts)Prairie Gates
(7,603 posts)BaronChocula
(4,237 posts)So basically filing a brief no one will read. It's already in the FOANX News script.
flashman13
(2,229 posts)Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(134,057 posts)3825-87867
(1,858 posts)And if they've not been "articulated etc" then how could he have searched...blah, blah, blubber.
Mr.Bee
(1,728 posts)States Rights over their elections and how they're handled??
States, Not the President, Run Elections in America
Tree Lady
(13,125 posts)Whatever they want.
Vinca
(53,606 posts)ashredux
(2,899 posts)thought crime
(1,385 posts)We need to have legal strategies to help prevent disruption, because they mean to do it.
gopiscrap
(24,640 posts)help folks get ID
DallasNE
(7,989 posts)As well as the Articles in the Constitution assigning elections to the States? I presume Trump will claim emergency powers override the clear intent.
pat_k
(12,883 posts)I have no doubt that Trump has been trying to strongarm/bully Thune to whip his conference to vote to nuke the filibuster.
As I posted in another thread
Fingers crossed that enough Republicans would vote against ending the filibuster, but I expect that ENORMOUS pressure will be put on Thune to whip his conference into nuking the filibuster.
The felon is hellbent on doing everything in his power to end free and fair elections in the United States. To that end, I have no doubt the regime will pull out all the stops in their efforts to get the new version of the SAVE act passed in the Senate.
We must not underestimate the regime's determination on this.
As long as our elections are capable of measuring the true will of the American people (even imperfectly), we can thwart their effort reshape the U.S. into the mold of other illiberal democracies.
They know this.
I suspect this EO will never actually materialize. It has the ring of other angry threats to do this or that "shortly" that have gone by the wayside. Of course, sycophants may come up with some bullshit EO to placate him, but if they do, I would be SHOCKED if it weren't universally rejected by the courts -- including SCOTUS.
Blumancru
(238 posts)It falls to the individual states. The states that will honor this Executive Order are states that vote red anyway. I dont think this will have much effect.
Interesting and a little off subject that there is nothing in the constitution requiring a popular vote for president. The states can choose the electors any way they want to. The legislature can appoint them or whatever.

