2026-04-02 20:56 GMT / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
作者：蒂尔尼·斯尼德
发布时间：2026年4月2日，美国东部时间下午4:56
亚历克斯·布兰登/美联社/档案照片
民主党人士将总统唐纳德·特朗普最新的选举改革尝试比作乔治·奥威尔的《1984》，这是目前对周二签署的行政令提出质疑的三项诉讼之一。该行政令指示美国邮政署决定哪些人可以、哪些人不能收到邮寄选票。
民主党国会领袖及相关组织、还有两个独立的选民权益团体联盟，分别提起了诉讼——这引发了一种似曾相识的感觉，因为特朗普的反对者此前曾成功提起法律诉讼，叫停了2025年3月特朗普一项行政令中的部分内容，该行政令当时试图提高公民身份证明要求。
诉讼方表示，特朗普在最新的行政令中为邮寄投票设置新障碍，以及单方面接管原本由各州负责的选举决策，再次违反了《宪法》和多项法律。
此外，特朗普的行政令要求联邦机构利用内部数据库创建一份“公民”名单并分享给各州。尽管该指令并未明确说明该名单的具体用途，但诉讼方辩称，这将违反旨在防止联邦政府像这部反乌托邦小说中描述的那样，针对公民构建“个人档案”的隐私法。他们进一步警告称，相关联邦数据库已被证明是确定选民资格的不可靠方式。
“这项行政令的条款晦涩难懂、令人困惑，”周三在华盛顿特区联邦法院提起诉讼的民主党团队诉讼文件中写道。“显而易见的是，它大幅限制了美国人通过邮寄方式投票的权利，侵犯了传统上属于各州的权力。”
参议院少数党领袖查克·舒默、众议院少数党领袖哈基姆·杰弗里斯、民主党全国委员会、民主党州长协会以及该党的国会竞选机构均联名签署了这项诉讼。
罗宾·贝克/法新社/盖蒂图片社/档案照片
“实际上，该行政令试图在选民与投票箱之间插入一道联邦筛查机制，授权联邦邮政运营商扣留部分选民的选票，”一个选民权益团体联盟在周四于马萨诸塞州提起的诉讼中表示。“此举取代了《宪法》和联邦法律赋予各州、国会负责监管选举的角色，以及美国邮政署作为中立、无歧视的邮件承运方的角色。”
周二签署的这项行政令是特朗普单方面将联邦政府介入选举管理的最新尝试，而选举管理的职责在很大程度上属于《宪法》赋予各州的权力。此前，他在国会提出的增加投票限制的立法努力已宣告失败。
“只有民主党政客和相关人员才会对保障美国选举安全、确保只有符合资格的美国公民参与投票的合法举措感到不满，”白宫发言人阿比盖尔·杰克逊在一份声明中表示。“特朗普总统在竞选时就承诺保障我们的选举安全，美国民众也再次将他送回白宫，以完成这项工作。”
但诉讼方辩称，这项行政令将剥夺符合资格选民的投票权，因为它要求希望通过美国邮政署递送选票的各州在选举前60天提交其邮寄选民名单。民主党人士指出，这一流程会将在选举前60天内搬家或成为归化公民的人群排除在外。该行政令还要求美国邮政署仅向满足特定选票设计及其他要求的州递送邮寄选票，民主党方面表示，这将“授予美国邮政署单方面权力，根据行政令中规定的标准确定哪些人有资格通过邮寄方式投票”。
诉讼方指控，该行政令除了违宪之外，还违反了管理美国邮政署的法律、《投票权法案》以及其他法规。
根据诉讼方的说法，行政令中的数据收集部分违反了《隐私法》，该法律对政府收集和使用美国人敏感信息的方式设定了要求。
“事实上，国会在修订相关条款、专门收紧对‘计算机匹配项目’的限制时强调，其目的是确保‘联邦政府……从法律上不可能构建任何类似于《1984》中描述的公民个人档案’，并将‘适当尊重个人隐私、数据保密性和系统安全性’，”民主党团队的诉讼文件中写道。
但诉讼文件继续指出，这项行政令指示联邦机构“兑现特朗普总统反复提出的主张，即联邦政府应通过构建此类数据库，掌控谁有资格投票”。
尽管该行政令并未明确说明这份“公民”名单的用途，但马萨诸塞州诉讼中的选民权益团体表示，“最合理的推断”是特朗普打算将其用于筛查邮寄选票。
特朗普的反对者警告称，这进一步存在剥夺符合资格选民投票权的风险，他们辩称，特朗普指示联邦政府使用的现有数据库和程序存在大量错误。
选举官员已经可以使用其中一项联邦公民身份数据项目——即所谓的SAVE系统——来审查其选民登记名单，而且由于该系统存在错误，“众多选举管理人员都表达了对该系统的不满和不信任”，第二个选民权益团体联盟在周四于华盛顿特区提起的诉讼中表示。
Trump’s new role for USPS in mail balloting is unconstitutional, three lawsuits say
2026-04-02 20:56 GMT / CNN
By Tierney Sneed
PUBLISHED Apr 2, 2026, 4:56 PM ET
President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters after signing an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House, on March 31, 2026.
Alex Brandon/AP/File
Democrats compared President Donald Trump’s latest attempt to overhaul elections to George Orwell’s “1984,” in one of three lawsuits now challenging Tuesday’s executive order, which instructs the US Postal Service to determine who does and doesn’t receive a mail ballot.
Democratic congressional leaders and organizations, as well as two separate coalitions of voter advocacy groups, each filed lawsuits – prompting a sense of deja vu, as those Trump opponents previously brought successful legal challenges that halted parts of a March 2025 Trump executive order that sought to boost proof of citizenship requirements.
The challengers say Trump is again violating the Constitution and several laws by imposing new hurdles to vote by mail in his latest executive order, and by unliterally taking over election decisions that are handled by states.
Additionally, Trump’s order calls for federal agencies to use internal databases to create a “citizen” list to share with states. While the directive doesn’t lay out explicitly how that list would then be used, the challengers argue that it would violate privacy laws intended to protect against the federal government assembling a “personal dossier” on citizens in the vein of the dystopian novel. Further, they warn, the federal databases in question have shown themselves to be a flawed way of determining who is eligible to vote.
“The Executive Order’s provisions are convoluted and confusing,” said the Democrats’ lawsuit, which was filed Wednesday in Washington, DC’s federal court. “What is clear is that it dramatically restricts the ability of Americans to vote by mail, impinging on traditional state authority.”
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic National Committee, the Democratic Governors Association, and the party’s congressional campaign arms all signed onto the lawsuit.
Mail-in ballots in their envelopes await processing at the Los Angeles County Registrar Recorders’ mail-in ballot processing center at the Pomona Fairplex in Pomona, California, on October 28, 2020.
Robyn Beck/AFP/Getty Images/File
“In effect, the Order seeks to interpose a federal screening regime between voters and the ballot box by empowering a federal mail carrier to withhold certain voters’ ballots,” a collection of voter advocacy groups said in a case filed Thursday in Massachusetts. “In doing so, the Order displaces the roles that the Constitution and federal law assign to the states and Congress to regulate elections and to USPS as a neutral, nondiscriminatory carrier of the mail.”
Tuesday’s executive order is Trump’s latest attempt to unilaterally insert the federal government in the administration of elections, a job the Constitution largely gives to the states. The order comes as his legislative effort to add restrictions to voting has floundered in Congress.
“Only Democrat politicians and operatives would be upset about lawful efforts to secure American elections and ensure only eligible American citizens are casting ballots,” White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said in a statement. “President Trump campaigned on securing our elections and the American people sent him back to the White House to get the job done.”
But the challengers argue the order will disenfranchise eligible voters, because it requires that states seeking to use USPS to deliver ballots submit lists of their mail voters 60 days before an election. That process would leave out people who move or become naturalized citizens within 60 days of an election, Democrats note. The order also requires USPS to only deliver mail ballots in states that meet certain ballot design and other requirements, which would “grant the Postal Service unilateral authority to determine who is eligible to vote by mail based on the criteria specified in the Order,” the Democrats said.
The order violates the law governing the Postal Service, the Voting Rights Act, and other statutes, the challengers allege, in addition to being unconstitutional.
The data collection part of the order, according to the challengers, runs afoul of the Privacy Act, which sets requirements for how the government goes about collecting and using sensitive information from Americans.
“Indeed, in enacting amendments that tightened restrictions specifically on ‘computerized matching programs,’ Congress underscored that its purpose was to ensure that it would be ‘legally impossible for the Federal Government … to put together anything resembling a ‘1984’ personal dossier on a citizen,’ and that ‘proper regard for privacy of the individual, confidentiality of data, and security of the system’ would be respected,” the Democrats’ lawsuit said.
But the executive order, the lawsuit continues, directs federal agencies “to make good on President Trump’s repeated claims that the federal government should take charge of who is “eligibl[e]” to vote precisely by amassing such a database.”
While the order does not explicitly state the purpose for the “citizen” list, the voting advocates in the Massachusetts lawsuit say that the “most reasonable inference” is that Trump intended it be used to screen mail ballots.
That further risks disenfranchisement of eligible voters, Trump’s opponents warn, arguing that the existing databases and programs he is instructing the federal government to use are riddled with errors.
Voting officials already have access to one of the federal citizenship data programs – known as SAVE – to review their registration lists, and because of the errors produced, “numerous election administrators have expressed their frustration and mistrust in the system,” a second coalition of voter advocacy groups said in a lawsuit filed in DC Thursday.
发表回复