A federal judge on Thursday handed President Donald Trump and election integrity advocates a major victory after rejecting Democrats’ desperate attempt to block Trump’s executive order aimed at tightening mail-in voting rules and strengthening citizenship verification for federal elections.

On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump-appointed jurist who clearly actually reads the Constitution, slapped down a multi-headed monster of lawsuits filed by the Democratic National Committee, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, and far-left activist groups like the NAACP, Common Cause, and the League of United Latin American Citizens.

The Democrats and their mainstream media allies have been throwing a collective temper tantrum ever since President Trump signedthe March 31 Executive Order.

The directive tackles the massive vulnerabilities in our election systems by utilizing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA) to build comprehensive state citizenship lists.It also instructs the U.S. Postal Service to ensure mail-in ballots areonlydelivered to verified, eligible adult citizens.

The order further directs the Attorney General to prioritize prosecutions of anyone sending ballots to ineligible voters and allows for the withholding of federal funds from non-compliant states.

To any sane American, ensuring only citizens vote is common sense. But to the radical left, verifying citizenship is an “unconstitutional nightmare.”

They ran crying to the courts, begging for an immediate preliminary injunction to stop the order before the upcoming midterm elections.

Judge Nichols wasn’t having any of it.In a scathing 26-page opinion, the judge ruled that the Democrats failed to show they have any standing or have suffered a single shred of actual harm.

“Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present,” Nichols wrote in his opinion.

The court repeatedly emphasized that the executive order merely directs agencies to begin lawful processes and does not itself remove voters, alter ballots, or force states to take any immediate action.

Source: The Gateway Pundit