Home · World · Aug 25 archive
Supreme court threatens midterms mail-in voting as it backs Trump plan
Confirmed
The Supreme Court concluded Monday that the states’ lawsuit was premature because the executive order itself had not yet inflicted the concrete injury needed for federal courts to intervene. The Supreme Court decision is provisional, focusing only on the argument that U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani acted prematurely in preventing the provisions from being implemented in the 23 states before federal agencies had even drawn up plans for how to implement the executive order. The Supreme Court decision is in line with one in a related case by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that rejected a separate attempt by Democrats to block the executive order.
USPS said it would not implement the new standards for the 2026 election unless the government obtains relief from the outstanding court injunctions. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a separate injunction on August 11 blocking nationwide implementation of the Postal Service portions of Trump’s order. A separate nationwide injunction issued earlier this month continues to block implementation of key U.S. Postal Service requirements, meaning the legal battle could return to the courts before ballots begin moving through the mail this fall. John Sauer wrote in the filing that it was premature for courts to rule on the issue, as neither the Postal Service nor other agencies have determined how they will implement the executive order. Under the proposed system, ballots that failed to comply with the required procedures could be returned rather than processed through the Postal Service.
Trump issued Executive Order 14399 on March 31, directing federal agencies to establish additional safeguards for federal elections. President Donald Trump has frequently railed against the widespread use of mail-in ballots as part of his broader complaints, offered without evidence, that the election system is plagued with fraud. In March he ordered the government to create a “state citizenship list” of eligible voters, requiring that mail-in ballots only be delivered to people on that list. California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said Monday night that his state will launch a new challenge to the Trump administration’s policy on mail-in voting. That means the administration may, at least in the short term, be able to implement the executive order, but the legal battle is far from over.
In a 6-3 decision, the Court granted the Trump administration’s emergency request in Trump v. California, allowing federal agencies to continue developing policies ordered by the president while litigation proceeds. A mental health advocate suspected of killing her police officer husband was found dead six days after she disappeared from her Massachusetts home, authorities said. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. Nor does it suggest that the Executive Branch has any constitutional or statutory authority to implement the President’s directives.
“The Order itself does not harm the States,” the Court said, adding that its ruling does not mean measures ultimately adopted by the administration will necessarily be lawful. US healthcare officials said a food-poisoning outbreak tied to alfalfa sprouts had sickened people in at least 15 states. The court also granted a similar application filed by Alabama and 11 other states. “This Administration will continue to lawfully enact the agenda President Trump was elected on — which includes the safety and security of our elections,” White House spokesperson Lauren Bis said in a statement. An independent arbitrator has ordered the Washington Post to rehire the high-profile opinion columnist Karen Attiah , who was fired abruptly last September over social media comments about Charlie Kirk.
What's confirmed
- The court’s justices voted 6-3 along ideological lines to lift an injunction that a judge in Massachusetts had placed in June on an executive order issued by the president.
- The justices, divided 6-3 along ideological lines with conservatives in the majority, lifted an injunction a Massachusetts-based judge imposed in June that prevented key aspects of the executive order from going into…
- On that score, time will tell,” the court said in an unsigned ruling .
- “The Order itself does not harm the States,” the Court said, adding that its ruling does not mean measures ultimately adopted by the administration will necessarily be lawful.
What's still developing
- In March he ordered the government to create a “state citizenship list” of eligible voters, requiring that mail-in ballots only be delivered to people on that list.
- The president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Derrick Johnson, said: “Let this ruling be a reminder that democracy is never, ever guaranteed.
- The US president said Canada had been “ripping off” the US for years and that it was “among the worst Nations in the World to deal with”.
- “It’s not a surprise for us that the US would take some form of reprisal to our response to their unjustified tariff,” he said.
- Carney has vowed to match the American tariffs “dollar for dollar”, and said Canada could not accept any proposed trade deal that would weaken French language protections .
- US Southern Command (SouthCom) said it had “executed a lethal kinetic strike on a low-profile vessel operating along established narco-trafficking routes in the Eastern Pacific”.
- US healthcare officials said a food-poisoning outbreak tied to alfalfa sprouts had sickened people in at least 15 states .
- A mental health advocate suspected of killing her police officer husband was found dead six days after she disappeared from her Massachusetts home, authorities said.