SB 1240 repeals Executive Order 14248, removing a federal directive that would govern election integrity practices and would enable certain data-sharing across federal and state systems. The bill also bars the use of federal funds to access state voter registration lists, voter list maintenance records, Federal immigration databases, or other public or private state records related to federal elections.
The combination of repeal and funding prohibition is framed as restoring constitutional balance between Congress, the states, and the executive branch, while narrowing the federal data-sharing toolbox that could affect elections.
At a Glance
What It Does
Repeals Executive Order 14248 and blocks federal funds from being used to implement or carry out that order, including access to state voter rolls and related data.
Who It Affects
Federal agencies (notably the Department of Government Efficiency) and any contractors involved in data-sharing for elections, as well as state and local election offices.
Why It Matters
Defines federalism boundaries for election administration and limits a president’s ability to deploy broad data-sharing initiatives that could affect voters and state records.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Defending America’s Future Elections Act targets a single, high-profile executive action and a specific set of data-sharing practices tied to federal elections. By repealing EO 14248, the bill rejects a federal directive that would otherwise dictate certain election integrity measures.
Importantly, it withholds federal funding from any effort to implement that EO, specifically prohibiting access to state voter registration lists, list-maintenance data, immigration databases, and other state records connected to federal elections. The bill anchors its rationale in longstanding voting laws and constitutional language that position Congress and the states as the primary actors in elections, while arguing that the executive branch exceeded its authority with EO 14248.
The result, if enacted, would preserve state sovereignty in election administration and reduce the potential for federal overreach into voter data and state records. The text relies on arguments about the authority of Congress and the states and cites the National Voter Registration Act and Help America Vote Act as part of a historical framework for election administration.
The measure does not introduce new election procedures or standards beyond repealing the order and restricting data-sharing funds. Overall, it signals a recalibration of federal involvement in election data and administration, with a focus on protecting voter information and state control.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Executive Order 14248 is repealed; it has no force or funding under the bill.
Section 4 bars federal funds from accessing voter registration lists, list maintenance records, immigration databases, or other state records related to federal elections.
The bill frames elections as a shared responsibility between Congress and the states, limiting executive overreach.
The bill references the NVRA (1993) and HAVA (2002) as historical anchors for election administration.
There are no provisions in the bill that create new federal data-sharing authorities for elections.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short Title
Section 1 provides the bill’s formal citation as the Defending America’s Future Elections Act, establishing the frame for its repeal and funding restrictions on an executive order tied to federal election administration.
Findings
Section 2 lays out congressional findings about the distribution of power over elections, the historical role of voter registration and election administration laws, and a critique of the cited executive action as beyond executive authority. It anchors the bill in constitutional language about the time, place, and manner of elections and cites prior election laws to situate the measure within a longstanding framework.
Repeal of Executive Order
Section 3 repeals Executive Order 14248, specifying that the order shall have no force or effect and that no federal funds may be used to implement, administer, enforce, or carry out its provisions. It creates a legal barrier to the order’s directives and closes the door on related federal actions tied to the order.
Prohibition on Use of Funds
Section 4 prohibits, notwithstanding any other law, the use or transfer of federal funds to enable access to state voter registration lists, list-maintenance records, immigration databases, or other state records related to federal elections. This curtails cross-system data-sharing activities that might influence election administration.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Elections across all five countries.
Explore Elections in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- State Secretaries of State and other state election officials, who gain autonomy over voter rolls and protection from federally driven data-sharing initiatives.
- Privacy-focused advocacy groups and civil liberties organizations, which benefit from reduced federal surveillance or data aggregation tied to elections.
- Nonpartisan election administration associations and policy researchers focused on federalism and governance, who gain clearer boundaries between federal and state roles.
- Voters who prioritize privacy and local control over election data, as federal intrusion is constrained.
Who Bears the Cost
- The Department of Government Efficiency and any federal programs that would have funded data-sharing activities.
- Federal contractors and vendors who provide data services for elections, who may face reduced demand or altered project scopes.
- States that had planned to participate in or rely on federal data-sharing for voter roll maintenance or election administration.
- Local election offices that would have benefited from federal data integration or technical assistance tied to federal datasets.
- Any federal agencies tasked with cross-border or immigration data use related to elections, which would face funding and authority constraints.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing the desire to prevent executive overreach in election data-sharing with the need for effective, consistent election administration that may rely on intergovernmental data exchanges; narrowing federal involvement may reduce potential privacy and sovereignty concerns but could also limit capabilities some officials view as useful for integrity and security.
The bill addresses a fundamental policy tension: ensuring robust, uniform election administration while preventing the federal government from pursuing expansive data-sharing that could affect voter privacy or state sovereignty. By repealing EO 14248 and blocking funding for its implementation, the measure reduces potential federal interference in how states manage voter rolls and related data.
Implementation challenges include how quickly the repeal translates into practice, how it interacts with existing data-sharing frameworks, and whether any residual federal authorities could re-emerge under other statutes or executive actions. There are unresolved questions about the scope of “state records related to federal elections,” how immigration databases might be implicated in practice, and how to square these prohibitions with legitimate federal security or enforcement functions that touch election processes.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.