The Supreme Court has paused a lower court’s ruling that blocked key directives from President Donald Trump’s executive order to restrict mail-in voting for this fall’s midterm elections in about two dozen states and Washington, D.C., according to KGOU. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts, which had previously blocked key parts of Trump’s order in 23 mainly Democratic-led states, plus Washington, D.C.
Supreme Court Pauses Lower Court Ruling on Trump Mail-In Voting Order
Despite the high court’s action, the majority did not decide on the constitutionality or legality of Trump’s executive order. The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful. On that score, time will tell,
the high court said in an unsigned order.
The court’s conservative majority ruled that the states that sued did not have the legal right to challenge the order at this stage. The three liberal justices dissented from the decision. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion that was joined by Justice Elena Kagan, stating, Because I believe the structure of the Executive Order, the Government’s representations, and the equities counsel against emergency relief requiring the States to wait to bring their serious challenges to the Executive Order, I respectfully dissent.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also publicly dissented, writing that the decision lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating for certain plaintiffs who seek to bring election-related challenges.
Details of the Executive Order and New Postal Service Rules
Trump himself voted by mail as recently as this year in Florida. The directive calls for the Department of Homeland Security to develop state lists of adult U.S. citizens and instructs the U.S. Postal Service to obtain lists of eligible mail voters from states. Under the order, the USPS is supposed to deliver mail-in ballots only to individuals on those approved lists, and election officials would be required to place specific barcodes on their mail ballot envelopes.
In response to the order, the Postal Service released a final rule for federal ballot mail that would forbid the agency from sending mail ballots from any state that does not comply with Trump’s directives. However, Judge Talwani’s June ruling had concluded that Trump overstepped a president’s authority under the U.S. Constitution—which grants power over federal election rules to state legislatures and Congress—and found that the USPS, as an agency independent of a president’s administration, has no legal authority to control mail-in voting.
Logistical Hurdles and Shorter Timelines for the Midterm Elections
With the start of absentee and mail-in voting for the midterms only weeks away, significant practical and legal hurdles remain regarding whether federal agencies and state election offices can actually implement the changes. North Carolina is required to send its first mail ballots to military and overseas voters on Sept. 4.
Solicitor General D. Furthermore, a second separate ruling from Judge Talwani would prevent the Postal Service from implementing procedural changes before the midterms and would likely need to be nullified.
Ongoing Legal Challenges and Future Outlook
The legal battle surrounding the voting restrictions is far from over. A separate set of lawsuits led by Democrats and voting rights groups continues to play out in the courts as the fall election draws closer. New York Attorney General Letitia James called the Supreme Court’s decision a painful setback but vowed that it would not be the final word on the matter.
