Supreme Court rejects Trump’s restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of midterms

On Monday, the Supreme Court rejected the restrictions that President Donald Trump sought to impose on voting by mail. The Court upheld a federal judge’s decision to block the president’s executive order, which would have jeopardized the votes of millions of people with less than two months to go before the midterm elections.

The decision allows states to continue sending out mail-in ballots under the same procedures they have used for years. The case has significant implications, as nearly one-third of the country votes by mail.

In a brief concurring opinion, Justice Brett Kavanaugh expressed his view that “local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections.” Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. Kavanaugh indicated that he might rule in favor of the government in the future.

Trump’s plan required states to adopt a standardized envelope design that included a barcode. In addition, they were required to submit lists of voters eligible to vote by mail through an online portal. The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) could refuse to deliver ballots to states that did not comply with the requirements.

The Supreme Court upheld the injunction against Trump’s proposed reform because, given the proximity of the midterm elections, states would not have time to deliver the ballots on time. Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin began mailing ballots to voters last week, while the new system was not yet active.

A U.S. Postal Service whistleblower reported that the postal system’s new requirements could result in millions of mail-in ballots never being sent, because the portal was poorly designed and a single barcode error could cause an entire batch of ballots to be discarded. The official warned that the “risky and hasty” implementation of Trump’s order could lead to a “catastrophic failure” in the mail-in voting system ahead of the November midterm elections.

Democratic state officials and voting rights advocacy groups challenged the restrictions in court, arguing that the president lacks the constitutional authority to set election rules that “would effectively eliminate mail-in voting on the eve of a major election.”

The presidential executive order signed in March has been the subject of back-and-forth legal battles that have kept voters on edge. The Supreme Court ruled last month against Boston District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee, who had sided with the plaintiffs. The Court then ruled that the decision was premature and lifted the injunction, though it refrained from ruling on the legality of the executive order. Days later, in response to another lawsuit, Judge Talwani once again suspended the reform of the system, finding that the states were not prepared to implement the changes in time. On this occasion, the Supreme Court has ruled in her favor.

Trump sought to justify the reform by arguing that the new measures were necessary to combat fraud — a claim he has repeated without evidence ever since he lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden. The Republican has sought to impose further changes ahead of the midterms in an attempt to maintain control of Congress.

Polls suggest that the Republican Party could lose the majority it currently holds in both chambers of Congress. Trump’s low approval ratings — due to the war in Iran, inflation, and his immigration policies — point to a bleak outlook for his party.

The new rules he wanted to impose on absentee voting would cost the Democrats votes, as it is the party that benefits most from citizens who use that method. Latino organizations have criticized the fact that their community is one of the hardest hit, since, due to the jobs they hold, many cannot take time off to go to polling stations.

Senator Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, stated that “this was one of the most important cases to protect voting rights before the Supreme Court. Trump’s plan to make it harder to vote was obviously unconstitutional. The Supreme Court had no choice but to make the right decision. The President’s attempt to screw around with vote by mail was obscene. Finally, his scheme is dead.”

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition