In potentially the most awaited race in the 2022 elections, the Secretary of State Race, Republican Diego Morales won for the Destiny Wells democrat and the libertarian Jeff Maurer. Morales thanked God in his speech of acceptance, repeated a handful of times that “the truth always prevails” in Spanish and in English, and devoted his victory to his parents who immigrated to Sellersburg when he was a boy.
The Secretary of State of Indiana, Diego Morales, praises his recent participation in the discussions for the implementation of the executive decree of President Donald Trump on the elections and the opportunity he had for thanking the president for having signed the Order, even if 19 states asked a Federal District Court to block the directive, calling it “unconstitutional, undemocratic and non -American”.
Morals issued a press release On Wednesday, saying that he was in Washington, DC, this week for “meetings and briefings” with the National Association of Secretaries of State and the American Elections Assistance Commission. He also said that he was invited to the White House to see Trump sign a directed decree Relaunch the coal industry and increase the use of coal in the production of inner energy.
The National Association of Secretaries of State confirmed that Morales met Lindsey Forson, deputy executive director, and Maria Benson, senior communications director, at the DC Nass office on Tuesday. They spoke for about 20 minutes and discussed moral work in Indiana during the problems of elections, securities and commercial services. He then presented to Forson and Benson with his Secretary of State of Indiana “Challenge Coins” as a sign of appreciation.
Likewise, the American Elections Assistance Commission confirmed that Morales had met an EAC commissioner yesterday, but provided no details on what was discussed or how long they talked.
Previously, Morales had spoken in support of the decree of Trump’s elections, currently the objective of a handful of prosecution, including one filed by the prosecutors General Democrats in 19 states.
The decree, entitled “Preserve and protect the integrity of the American elections” And signed by Trump on March 25, includes several provisions placing new requirements on states in election administration, threatening to retain federal funds for non-compliance and forcing voters to prove that they are American citizens.
Secretary of State Diego Morales.
“One of our greatest achievements since taking in office has been our efforts to finally request proof of citizenship when individuals try to register to vote,” said morals in a declaration After the elections, the executive order was signed by Trump. “During my mandate, I heard many concerns concerning the non-citizens registered to vote, either through the office of motor vehicles (BMV), nor during various registration of voters. We are determined to make sure that this does not happen in Indiana, and non-citizens will not end on our electoral roles. ”
However, lawyers for elections law and voting rights defend that the executive order was illegal and unconstitutional. Michael Waldman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Brennan Center for Justice, an independent and non -profit organization for non -profit, non -profit, describes Trump’s order as “categorically illegal in most of its details”. In addition, Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU voting rights project, denounced the order As “armed xenophobia and the myth of electoral fraud to compromise our rights”.
Julia Vaughn, executive director of the common cause of Indiana, said that the decree will currently have “zero impact” on hoosier voters because the electoral laws are noted in the congress and the states, and that a president cannot overcome these statutes. Even thus, she considers order as “a threat to free and fair elections” and an “effort to deprive more Americans with targeted rules, which are based on false stories about problems that do not exist”.
The executive decree claims that “the United States cannot now apply the basic and necessary electoral protections used by modern and developed nations” and “has not adequately applied federal electoral requirements”. In particular, the order requires several stages to prevent non-citizens from voting, despite considerable evidence that immigrants and foreign nationals do not vote in the American elections.
In addition to the requirement according to which voters provide documentary evidence of American citizenship, the decree directs the Ministry of Internal Security to give the State and local authorities access to systems to verify the status of citizenship and to coordinate with the administrator of the Ministry of Government Effectiveness (DOGE) to “review the list of recording of voters accessible to the public of each state”. The American prosecutor general is also required to “prioritize the application” of the laws which prevent non-citizens from registering for the vote or to vote and to coordinate with the attorney general of the State to help the examination and the pursuit of these offenders.
Vaughn said that she thought that the decree will encourage Morals and the General Assembly of Indiana to develop the laws and policies of the States imitating the directives of the decree on the voting of non-citizens. As an example of the way in which receptive state representatives are at the myth of the voting of non-citizens, she underlined Morales and the Attorney General of Indiana Todd Rokita asking us for citizenship and immigration services to services Check citizenship status On nearly 600,000 Indiana voters only a few weeks before the November 2024 elections.
“There are a lot of bad ideas that come out of Washington, DC, concerning the elections that are fully adopted in Indiana and take us in the wrong direction, on this issue,” said Vaughn.
The executive decree also contains provisions, according to an analysis By the Brennan Center for Justice, which orders the election assistance committee to aid all the voting systems of all states within six months and to rectify them according to new federal standards, that no market voting system is currently meeting. In addition, the order allows managers of internal and interior security to access the information of voters of each state; penalizes the states which include the ballots sent by the post office which were sent before the day of the ballot but received after the closure of the polls; And asks the US prosecutor to retain money from the states that do not comply.
In the trial State of California, et al. v. Trump, and Al.1: 25-CV-10810, filed on April 3 before the US District Court of the Massachusetts District, the 19 attorneys of the State challenge the elections’ decree. State officials argue that Trump’s order violates the American Constitution by interfering with the sovereignty of the States and the constitutional power to regulate the federal elections. In addition, they argue that their states should divert the time and resources of “vital electoral priorities” towards the implementation, “at the frantic rhythm”, the mandates of the decree.
“Even with this effort, the elections are realized and open the field of chaos in the electoral systems of the applicant’s states, as well as the threat of deprivation of their rights,” said prosecutors.
Rep. Timothy Wesco, R-osceola, The President of the Indiana House Elections and Distribution Committee has not criticized Trump’s decree, saying that state elections were affected by federal laws and policies. However, he maintained that there is force in the elections organized at the level of the state.
“I think that from an operational point of view, (the elections) should be absolutely operated on at the level of the state and the local level, not a federal level,” said Wesco. “But I also realize that there is long -standing legislation at the federal level which has an impact on the way in which the national and local elections are carried out.”
When asked if Indiana needed more federal surveillance in the elections, the representative bypassed.
“If the question was:” We need more federal surveillance, the end point “, I would say no,” said Wesco.
