Supreme Court rejects Trump’s restrictions on mail voting

Supreme Court rejects Trump’s restrictions on mail voting

The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a Trump administration plan to dramatically change how Americans vote by mail in the lead-up to the midterm elections, a major loss for President Trump, who has long claimed without evidence that fraud is rampant in mail voting.

The ruling was a resounding win for Democratic-led states and voting rights groups, which had argued that the plan was unconstitutional and an existential threat to the democratic process.

The Trump administration’s efforts, they had said, would introduce chaos and confusion as early voting gears up in many states.

Still, the weekslong legal tussle over the issue may have sown its own kind of confusion, a victory of sorts for Mr. Trump as he seeks to cast doubt on the integrity of the vote in an election his party might lose.

The majority provided a one-paragraph explanation for the ruling, writing that the government was “unlikely to succeed on the merits.”

The order was unsigned, which is typical in emergency rulings. It gave no vote count. Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence. Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. dissented, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

The battle over the Trump administration’s plan to change mail-in voting has played out over the last few weeks in a dizzying series of legal developments, even as states began sending out ballots.

Trump administration lawyers had urged the justices to step in and clear the way for its plan to use the Postal Service to screen ballot envelopes after they are submitted by state elections officials. The new rules would require states to submit lists of voters approved to receive mail ballots. The Postal Service would then deliver mail ballots only to the voters on the lists.

The plan would also require states to use an envelope approved by the Postal Service, including a unique bar code for each voter. Some states have argued that redesigning ballots so close to the election would be challenging or perhaps impossible, causing delays.

  • Credits: The New York Times
  • Author: Abbie VanSickle
  • Photo: Rebecca Noble

Compartir:

Facebook
X
LinkedIn

El enigmático porvenir de Cuba

Jorge G. Castañeda ___________________________ Nadie puede pronosticar con certeza qué va a suceder en Cuba. Puede haber una negociación entre la dinastía Castro y Trump, a la venezolana. Podría producirse un levantamiento de la gente y, a pesar de una represión feroz, la caída del régimen, a la rumana. No se puede descartar una intervención militar de Washington, aunque parezca poco probable a estas alturas. O, por último, puede no suceder nada y perpetuarse el status quo a pesar del

Leer más »
Lo que está juego en la elección 2027; tres mil cargos entre mayoría calificada en el Congreso más 17 gubernaturas Presenta Cultura a ganadoras del Premio 2026 de Literatura Indígena «Erasmo Palma» Mantendrá Limpia servicio regular de recolección de basura durante día festivo Trump defended A.I. data centers on Truth Social, and commenters clapped back Bajo figura de «defensores», partidos se burlan del INE y todas las leyes electorales El enigmático porvenir de Cuba - Jorge G. Castañeda Establece UTPN alianza con el Banco para el Desarrollo de América del Norte Protección Civil emite varias recomendaciones ante lluvias y tormentas eléctricas Anthropic says it blocked possible efforts to build biological weapons Sedena y Semar se reúnen con el Comando Norte de EU para ampliar capacidades Filtran primeras novedades del Xiaomi 18 Pro previo a su presentación en septiembre Video: Impulsar la vigilancia electoral ante la falta de confianza | Lorenzo Córdova