NewzWASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Monday in a case over President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much can be implemented before the fast-approaching midterm elections.The decision leaves room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump's order, and other similar cases have already been filed. Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but time is running short to impose major changes with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.The Supreme Court's conservative majority didn’t decide the legality of Trump's order, instead ruling that the states did not have the legal right to challenge it.“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 majority wrote in an unsigned order.The three liberal-leaning justices publicly dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writing that the rule “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.”New York Attorney General Letitia James foreshadowed more legal wrangling, calling the decision a “painful setback” but vowing it would “not be the final word.”The court’s order opens a path for the administration to begin action to restrict mail voting, but it also could lead to a bevy of potential further litigation that could freeze the federal government again, all starting 10 days before the first mail ballots in the nation are scheduled to be sent to overseas and military voters from North Carolina.“This is just the first inning of a very fast nine-inning game,” said Derek Muller, a law professor at Notre Dame University.Trump fights mail-in voting despite its growing popularityMail balloting has long been a favorite target for Trump, who has claimed that it breeds fraud despite strong evidence to the contrary and his own use of the voting method.Trump's executive order, signed in March, calls on his administration to create lists of eligible voters and orders the U.S.
Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to people on those lists.Democratic officials in 23 states and the District of Colum… The Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for US President Donald Trump to move ahead with his executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much his administration can implement before the fast-approaching midterm elections. The decision appears to leave room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump’s order.
The US Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week but time is running short to impose major changes with some... The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Monday in a case over President Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much can be implemented before the fast-approaching midterm elections.The decision appears to leave room for additional court challenges that could further slow Trump's order, including in another similar case. The Justice Department had filed an emergency appeal asking the high court to allow work on implementing the changes before the midterms.Trump's executive order, signed in March, calls on his administration to create lists of eligible voters and orders the U.S.
They argued that the Constitution gives states and Congress the power to run elections, and Trumps changes could lead to chaos and partisan abuse.The consequences of allowing such transformative changes to take effect so close to this falls elections would be extreme, attorneys for the states wrote. Dozens of state and local election officials weighed in, asking the justices to leave the order frozen while election preparations are already underway.A judge in Massachusetts blocked the plan for the midterm elections in those states. An appeals court upheld her decision.
She later granted a second order blocking it nationwide, another potential stumbling block for Trump administration plan.The Justice Department appealed to the Supreme Court on procedural grounds in late July, arguing that the states sued too soon. They also pointed to another ruling out of Washington, where a judge allowed Trumps order to proceed. An appeals court backed that decision, while still leaving room for future court action if the changes are implemented.Feder…
Mail balloting has long been a favorite target for the president, who has claimed that it breeds fraud despite strong evidence to the contrary and his own use of the voting method. The Supreme Court lifted a judge’s block on President Trump’s executive order adding to mail voting requirements, removing a key roadblock that prevented the policy from going into effect for the midterms. Over the public dissents of the three liberal justices, the high court said Monday that the judge had no authority to block Trump’s [...]
Summary from source