Multiple states are pushing back against President Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting, setting up a constitutional showdown over federalism and election administration that could reshape how Americans cast ballots in future federal elections.

The order, signed last week, directs states to limit mail-in voting to voters who meet specific criteria such as military deployment, overseas residence, or verified disability. According to Time magazine, at least 18 states have indicated they will not comply, arguing that the Constitution gives states—not the federal government—authority over election administration.

"The president does not have the constitutional power to dictate how states run their elections," California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement. "We will continue to allow all eligible Californians to vote by mail, as they have for decades."

The dispute centers on a fundamental question of American governance: who controls elections? Under the Constitution's Elections Clause, states have primary authority to determine the "times, places and manner" of federal elections, though Congress retains the power to "make or alter" state regulations. Executive orders from the president have no explicit role in that framework, according to election law scholars.

The practical implications are significant, particularly for military service members and overseas Americans. Defense Department data shows that more than 1.3 million active-duty personnel and their families rely on mail-in absentee ballots to vote from bases across the world. Veterans' organizations have warned that restricting mail voting could disenfranchise troops stationed in Japan, Germany, and combat zones where in-person voting is impossible.

"Our service members shouldn't have to choose between defending their country and exercising their right to vote," said Paul Rieckhoff, founder of Independent Veterans of America.