- What We do
- Legal Advocacy
- State of California v. Trump
State of California v. Trump
On May 15, 2025, Public Rights Project filed an amicus brief in the District of Massachusetts in State of California v. Trump on behalf of local elections officials in 30 jurisdictions. PRP filed the brief against a new executive order that would disenfranchise voters and cause significant disruptions to local election administration.
Our brief supports the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction against Executive Order No. 14248, titled “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.” The executive order seeks to drastically and unlawfully change how voter registration and election administration work nationwide. The plaintiffs are states that argue that the order is unconstitutional, violates federal statutes, and undermines election administration.
The order places a burden on local election officials when it comes to the practical administration, budgeting, staffing, and scheduling of elections. For example, the order changes two federal voter registration forms to require that people provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to vote. These changes are completely impractical and make it more difficult to register voters. The amicus brief also explains the order’s attempt to override state law governing ballot receipt deadlines is logistically impossible and ignores the real budgetary, staff, and time constraints local election officials already face.
Local election officials are under-staffed, over-worked, and under increasing public pressure. The unlawful executive order only makes these problems worse.
-
Legal case8/26/2025
United States v. City of Rochester
A coalition of 49 cities, counties, and elected officials are pushing back against the Trump…
-
Legal case8/25/2025
Culture of Life Family Services v. Bonta
Public Rights Project filed an amicus brief supporting the authority of local governments to investigate…
-
Legal case8/14/2025
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996; Interpretation of ‘Federal Public Benefit’ Comment
On behalf of 15 local governments and 21 local government leaders, Public Rights Project filed…