A federal court on Thursday blocked parts of President Donald Trump’s March executive order on voting in elections.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued an injunction for Sections 2(a) and 2(d) of the executive order titled, “Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.”

Section 2(a) ordered the Election Assistance Commission, an agency with a stated mission of helping Americans participate in the voting process, to require documentary proof of citizenship. Section 2(d) required the head of each federal voter registration agency to assess citizenship before providing a voter registration form to participants in public assistance programs.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, writing in a memorandum opinion for three consolidated cases against Trump and the Executive Office of the President, said the executive order would harm the federal agencies it is directed at.

"The plaintiffs have also shown that implementation of Sections 2(a) and 2(d) by the Election Assistance Commission and other federal agencies would cause them irreparable harm and would not be in the public interest,” Kollar-Kotelly said, with the plaintiffs being the Democratic National Committee (DNC), the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) and the League of Women Voters Education Fund. “As a result, they are entitled to a preliminary injunction against that implementation."

Trump said in the executive order that the U.S. “largely relies on self-attestation" to prove citizenship for voting, noting the country doesn’t enforce basic and necessary “election protections” employed by developed nations.

Kollar-Kotelly wrote that the defendants’ “threshold arguments” falter when pitted against the plaintiffs’ challenges.

“And on the merits, the plaintiffs are substantially likely to prevail: Our Constitution entrusts Congress and the States—not the President—with the authority to regulate federal elections,” the judge said.

Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, often called the Elections Clause, says that “the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.”

The League of Women Voters of the United States expressed happiness over the court’s ruling, with chief counsel Marcia Johnson saying in a statement the decision is a “major victory” for voters across the country.

“While the fight is far from over, we're glad the court agreed that a President cannot ‘short-circuit’ Congress and unilaterally use an illegal executive order to obliterate the rights of millions of voters,” Johnson said.

DNC Chair Ken Martin; Democratic Governors Association Chair Laura Kelly; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Suzan DelBene; Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of the House of Representatives, D-N.Y., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., noted in a joint statement that the court's decision represents a "huge step in the fight to protect our democracy."

"Democrats fought back using every tool at our disposal – including taking Trump to court – to stop this illegal overreach that would have disenfranchised voters," the statement read.

NPR reported White House spokesperson Harrison Fields as saying that Trump will keep fighting for "election integrity" despite Democratic objections that "reveal their disdain for commonsense safeguards like verifying citizenship."

"Free and fair elections are the bedrock of our Constitutional Republic, and we're confident in securing an ultimate victory in the courtroom," Fields reportedly added.

The executive order was rather a "blatant attempt to override federal law, bypass Congress, and deter lawful voters from participating in our democracy," according to LULAC National President and Chairman of the Board Roman Palomares. He told The National News Desk the impact of the order would have been devastating.

"LULAC joined this legal challenge because the stakes were too high ... The Court rightly upheld the principle that voting is a right—not a privilege reserved for a select few," Palomares said.

Have questions, concerns or tips? Send them to Ray at .