Supreme Court Allows Trump to Pursue Mail Ballot Rules, California Vows to Fight

Supreme Court Grants Emergency Appeal on Federal Election Rules

Acting by a 6-3 vote, the high court’s conservative majority granted an emergency appeal from President Trump’s lawyers on Monday. The decision sets aside a lower judge’s order that previously blocked federal agencies—specifically the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S.

The underlying dispute stems from a March executive order issued by President Trump. That directive instructed the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of eligible citizen voters in each state, and ordered the U.S. Postal Service to restrict its processing of mail ballots to individuals appearing on those specific federal lists. While the high court’s ruling allows agencies to continue working to comply with the order, the unsigned majority opinion emphasized that the decision reaches no conclusions regarding the ultimate legality of the pending rules.

“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 high court wrote. The court’s three liberal justices dissented in two separate opinions.

California Officials Prepare New Lawsuit Against Postal Service Rules

California leaders responded to the high court’s decision by noting its procedural nature while promising immediate legal action. “The Supreme Court just let the Trump administration move ahead (for now) with its plan to disenfranchise voters across the country. California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement reported by CNBC.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta characterized the high court ruling as “somewhat disappointing” but “purely procedural” and far from the final word on the matter. Bonta explained that the court determined the state’s previous lawsuit was not ripe because no final Postal Service rule was in place at the time of filing. However, following the Postal Service’s issuance of a 95-page final rule on Friday—which implements parts of the executive order by establishing new requirements for mail ballot designs, envelopes, and data collection—state attorneys expect to launch a new challenge within days.

“It doesn’t address the merits. And we think that when the merits are addressed — and we will bring a lawsuit to address the merits of this case — that we will prevail, because the president has zero authority to determine the time, place and manner of elections, and he is through an executive order trying to exert a very significant amount of authority,” Bonta stated.

Dual Injunctions and the Path Ahead for November Midterms

Despite the Supreme Court’s action, the practical implementation of the Postal Service’s new mail-ballot system remains blocked by a separate nationwide injunction issued on August 11 by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston. That ruling successfully halted USPS from putting the procedures into effect for the November 3 midterm elections, requiring the administration to overcome that separate legal barrier as well.

White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis defended the administration’s actions in a statement to The Times, calling the high court’s ruling a “major win for the security of American elections.” Bis added, “These are commonsense measures that protect the security of mail-in ballots and ensure only Americans are electing American leaders. This Administration will continue to lawfully enact the agenda President Trump was elected on — which includes the safety and security of our elections.”

As state and local election officials prepare to send ballots to military and overseas voters in early September, the case now returns to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.