The Trump administration went to the Supreme Court Monday asking for an emergency ruling to let it overhaul mail-in ballots and assemble citizenship lists for the 2026 midterms.
The appeal came two days after a First Circuit Court of Appeals panel upheld a lower court ruling preventing the federal government from enforcing the executive order. It was the latest rebuke for President Donald Trump’s effort to exert control over the midterms, keeping on hold a directive he signed in March.
In the new appeal, the administration is doing some baby-splitting. It argues that the injunction blocking the order is premature, since the administration has only given out “guidance” so far, and also that the government needs to be free to get processes underway to enforce these changes by November.
“If and when the agencies take concrete actions that actually injure them, the States can pursue claims at that time, at which point courts can resolve any legal questions presented in a non-hypothetical posture,” the administration wrote.
If the Supreme Court followed its own guidance with any consistency, the Purcell principle — which prevents courts from changing voting procedures close to elections — would have some heft here, as the administration is demanding enormous and ill-defined changes when the midterms are already underway in many states. In recent years, though, the Roberts Court has tended to invoke or ignore Purcell in accordance with Republican preferences.
The Trump administration is also seeking an administrative stay, which would let the executive order spring into immediate effect.
In the appellate court ruling from Saturday, the panel was composed of two Biden appointees and one Trump appointee. Judge Joshua Dunlap, the Trump judge, dissented from the majority in part, finding that the injunction was not justified as to the part of the executive order that mandates the creation and distribution of state citizenship lists. He wrote that it “does not order States, including Plaintiffs, to take any action based on the State Citizenship List,” and merely provides states with “further resources” to use in law enforcement.
The majority decision dealt solely with the question of whether the plaintiffs — around half the states — have standing to challenge the executive order. The administration has maintained that all their injuries are speculative, since the agencies involved have not yet produced final rules to enforce the order’s requirements. The majority was unconvinced.
“As the district court reasoned, the EO lays out a clear set of rapidly approaching deadlines by which states must coordinate with federal officials and comply with new voting procedures — all while the states must also ensure that their officials and the public understand the evolving set of rules that would govern the upcoming September and November elections,” the panel wrote.
The district court had also held the order to be unconstitutional; the government only challenged the part of its finding that the case was ripe for plaintiffs to challenge, so the constitutionality question was not before this panel.
It has become routine for Republicans to fearmonger about the tamperability of absentee voting, and the Trump administration’s efforts to make it harder for voters (who it mostly assumes to be Democrats) to vote by mail have intensified as the midterms get closer.
Read the Supreme Court appeal here:
Read the First Circuit ruling here:
Not-a-cat.
Get your tiny stinking hands off our elections.
This paragraph embodies exactly why the Supreme Court needs to be reformed. It should never belong to a political party regardless of how many fishing trips and vacation homes the Federalist billionaires hand out.
Go away trump and take yer loss as a grown up for once
After MAIL IN VOTING in the primaries…but then he is SO busy and important ripping up DC that he HAS to do it.
I wouldn’t bet the farm on a favorable ruling for the rule of law on this one.
The First Felon will find a way to get what he wants. He typically does.