Full story
Supreme Court procedural win
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday lifted a lower-court block on President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting, ruling that legal challenges filed by Democratic-run states were premature.
“allows the U.S. Postal Service to continue its rulemaking process for now”
The Oregon Attorney General’s Office said the ruling found that legal challenges to Trump’s elections executive order are premature, and that it “allows the U.S. Postal Service to continue its rulemaking process for now.”
In North Carolina, the WRAL report said the decision means Trump’s effort to crack down on mail-in voting can move forward “for now,” while leaving open the possibility of later court action.
The executive order, issued in March and described by the Oregon Attorney General’s Office, requires the Department of Homeland Security to create lists of eligible voters in each state, directs states to submit their voter lists to USPS, and directs USPS to refuse to deliver ballots to anyone not on those lists.
A Reuters explainer said the Supreme Court’s 6-3 conservative majority lifted a June injunction from Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani but left “the door open for them to sue again as the midterm contest approaches.”
Chaos warnings and dissent
The AP reported that while the Supreme Court’s decision cleared one obstacle, it “may not mean the order ultimately takes effect for November’s elections,” and said it has already thrown uncertainty into the method that nearly one-third of the country uses to vote.
In dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson warned that the decision “needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections,” as the AP described the compressed timeline facing election officials.
WRAL quoted a North Carolina State Board of Elections spokesman, Jason Tyson, saying, “With so much left unresolved, we cannot comment on hypotheticals about what may or may not happen with the USPS and the executive order in the courts, as the situation is uncertain.”
The Reuters report said the Supreme Court did not act on another injunction from Talwani that blocked the USPS nationwide from enforcing the directive’s tighter rules for voting by mail.
In California, Gavin Newsom said the Supreme Court “just let the Trump administration move ahead (for now) with its plan to disenfranchise voters across the country,” while the White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis called the decision “a win for election security.”
What happens next
The Reuters explainer said the full impact remains uncertain because “another injunction issued by Talwani in August in a separate case that blocks the USPS from implementing Trump’s order remains in place.”
“another injunction issued by Talwani in August in a separate case that blocks the USPS from implementing Trump’s order remains in place”
It added that despite the judicial orders, the USPS issued a final rule on Friday to carry out Trump’s directive, requiring states to supply the USPS with lists of mail ballot recipients and to ensure outbound and return ballot envelopes bear unique barcodes.
In Vermont, WCAX said the Supreme Court ruling is raising questions about the future of universal vote-by-mail, but that “as of right now, there is no effect on Vermonters being able to access their ballots,” while Sarah Copeland Hanzas said the executive order “tramples on states’ rights to administer their own elections.”
In North Carolina, WRAL reported that unless ordered to do otherwise, the state plans to begin sending out ballots next week on Sept. 4, with the possibility that ending mail-in voting over non-compliance could affect thousands of voters.
The AP said a second injunction barring the U.S. Postal Service from making changes to comply with Trump’s directive remains in effect, even as the administration filed a motion late Monday asking that the second hold be removed and posted new USPS regulations that would go into effect Tuesday if the legal pathway is fully cleared.