All articles tagged with #mail ballots
President Trump abruptly reversed his long-standing opposition to mail voting, urging Republicans to use absentee ballots in the 2026 midterms. This shift follows a Supreme Court ruling that blocked his administration's attempt to restrict mail voting and coincides with polling showing Democrats gaining ground in both chambers of Congress.
The Supreme Court rejected Donald Trump’s attempt to restrict mail-in voting ahead of the midterms, allowing states to continue with their existing mail-ballot practices. Trump criticized the ruling, arguing it undermines the court and could have political consequences. The piece notes that roughly a third of voters use mail ballots and that fraud is exceedingly rare, while Trump has a long history of clashing with judges and the court on various issues.
President Trump blasted the Supreme Court’s midterm mail-ballot ruling, calling the justices he appointed “betrayals” and accusing them of bowing to the Radical Left. The court blocked his administration’s attempt to tighten mail-ballot rules; Justice Kavanaugh joined the majority in a separate concurrence, while Justices Alito and Thomas dissented and Gorsuch and Barrett did not dissent. The majority’s reasoning was not explained in the emergency order, and the decision effectively ends the litigation for the election cycle.
Legal analyst Marty Lederman argues the Supreme Court should deny the government’s stay of the USPS Final Rule for the 2026 election, focusing on the balance of equities rather than resolving the merits. The Rule’s nine preconditions could delay or prevent ballot delivery and disenfranchise voters in many jurisdictions, while the government offers little evidence of irreparable harm, making denial the straightforward equitable outcome. He also notes that even if the Rule might be ultra vires on merits, the equities alone justify keeping the injunction in place for the 2026 election, consistent with precedents like California and Winter.
Trump’s administration filed an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court asking for sweeping USPS authority to withhold delivery of mail ballots, bypassing lower courts amid a yearlong fight over an executive order expanding federal involvement in elections. The push would require states to submit voter lists to USPS and add barcodes to envelopes, changes critics say could disenfranchise voters and infringe on states’ control of elections. With midterm ballots already in circulation in some states and a fast-moving timeline, the Court requested responses by Tuesday as it weighs expedited action amid partisan tension and whistleblower concerns about the USPS plan.
The Trump administration asked the First Circuit to treat a district court’s 14‑day TRO blocking parts of USPS’s final mail-ballot rule as an appealable injunction and to issue an immediate stay, arguing ballots may go out before the order lifts. Judge Talwani had blocked mandatory envelope and portal provisions for the 2026 election, while DOJ contends the rule is a modest regulation on states, not a takeover of election administration.
The Hill reports that the Supreme Court’s emergency docket is heating up during the summer recess as Trump presses to revive mail-ballot restrictions and resume White House ballroom construction, while Apple fights a contempt ruling in its Epic Games dispute; the docket also includes a Tennessee execution bid and an emergency bid to save a dog named Bruce, signaling a crowded slate before the Court’s summer break.
California and 22 Democratic-led states asked the Supreme Court to block the Trump administration’s USPS-backed effort to restrict mail ballots, arguing it’s too late in the election year and could cause errors and disenfranchise voters, while noting that states—not the president—set federal election rules.
A U.S. appeals court in the District of Columbia allowed the Trump administration to continue pursuing its mail-ballot executive order, ruling that the challenge is premature since USPS has not yet implemented regulations. The decision comes as the DOJ asks the Supreme Court to intervene and as other courts weigh related injunctions ahead of the midterm elections, keeping the policy in limbo while litigation unfolds.
An appellate court panel declined to block Donald Trump's order expanding mail-in ballots, allowing it to stand for now, but it did not resolve whether the measure will be in effect for the upcoming midterm elections, keeping the outcome uncertain.
The Supreme Court preserved state post-election grace periods for counting postmarked mail ballots, a win for states but a political setback for Trump, while also agreeing to hear an Arizona case that could revive citizenship-proof requirements under the National Voter Registration Act and enable pre-election mass purges of noncitizens, signaling more election-law battles ahead toward 2028.
A federal judge blocked key provisions of President Trump’s executive order aimed at restricting mail ballots, ruling the president lacks authority to limit who can receive them. The decision comes a month after another judge had allowed parts of the order to stand, and the case remains tied up in ongoing litigation, including actions in Washington, D.C.
With weeks left in its term, the Supreme Court will issue rulings on birthright citizenship via Trump’s order, state bans on transgender athletes, the president’s power to remove independent‑agency officials (FTC), firing a Fed governor (Lisa Cook), grace periods for mail ballots, TPS terminations for Syria and Haiti, limits on coordinated campaign spending, and gun possession by a marijuana user—potentially reshaping immigration, civil rights, administrative law, elections, and gun policy.
The USPS, already dealing with a cash shortfall and cost-cutting pressures, faces a presidential executive order aimed at restricting mail voting by compiling lists of eligible voters and directing the Postal Service to send only ballots for those voters. The order has been challenged by more than 20 states as unconstitutional, underscoring a broader political battle over voting by mail amid ongoing postal strain.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative bloc signaled readiness to rule that ballots must be received by election day to be counted, potentially upending California’s practice of counting late-arriving mail ballots and pressuring voters to mail earlier. The case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, challenges state rules allowing postmarked ballots that arrive after Election Day to be counted, a practice followed by several western states. A ruling upholding a strict receipt deadline could redefine how ballots are handled nationwide and affect election timing and outcomes.