Hello, and happy Thursday! Welcome back to The Franchise.
On Monday, the Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration in an unsigned order, with the conservative majority allowing the Trump administration, at least for now, to move forward with implementing rules to help carry out Trump’s March executive order. The order called for the creation of citizenship lists to control who can vote, and for the U.S. Postal Service to get heavily involved in policing who can receive a mail ballot.
A group of 23 blue states and Washington D.C. challenged the implementation of the order, arguing in federal court that the executive action — which directs the Department of Homeland Security to create a federal citizenship list to determine who can vote by mail and exclude anyone not on that list — violates the Constitution.
On Monday, the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of the executive order but rather lifted a lower court injunction on it, saying the states lacked standing to challenge the executive order because any wrongs they might suffer are still hypothetical. It gives Trump administration federal agencies, like the USPS, the greenlight to begin drafting policies and rules that would allow it to implement Trump’s executive order. The USPS formally published a final rule last week (confusingly before this decision came down, more on that here).
There has been a flurry of procedural developments since SCOTUS issued its decision that will ultimately clear the way for the case to make its way back to the Supreme Court for the justices to, potentially, rule on the merits. My colleagues Kate Riga and John Light have been covering it diligently. You can read some of the latest here, here and here.
In the face of the Supreme Court’s formal can-kicking — keeping us in legal limbo for an unclear amount of time about whether Trump’s executive action to try to give the federal government control over who can vote and whether someone receives a ballot before the midterms — Democratic governors are seizing the moment to remind Americans that states have the constitutional right to administer their own elections. And to rail against the Supreme Court for dodging on the merits of an issue that could radically impact the midterms.
In a post on X, Democratic New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill called Monday’s news a “terrible decision from Trump’s Supreme Court.”
“States run elections, not Donald Trump. I will do everything I can to protect New Jerseyans’ right to vote – by mail and in person,” she added.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) also railed against Monday’s decision.
“WOW. The Supreme Court just let the Trump Admin move ahead (for now) with its plan to disenfranchise voters across the country,” he wrote on X. “California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented.”
Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) similarly called the decision “disappointing” but assured constituents that it is “not the end of the story.”
“SCOTUS allowed the Trump Administration to begin planning for the executive order, but it did not rule on whether carrying it out would be lawful,” he wrote on X. “While the Court defers that decision for another day, Connecticut will continue to defend the safe, secure, and accessible elections we hold in this state—including mail-in ballots.”
And Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro vowed to keep fighting the Trump order.
“Not so fast. Today’s SCOTUS decision does NOT deal with the substance of Trump’s unconstitutional Executive Order and does not mean his illegal attempt to restrict mail-in voting will go forward,” he wrote on X.
“Donald Trump does not run elections here in Pennsylvania — or in any state,” he added. “We’ll see the Trump Administration in court. In the meantime, I’ll keep defending Pennsylvanians’ right to free, fair, and secure elections.”
As always, there is a lot more to catch up on. Let’s dig in.
DHS Can’t Actually Backup Noncitizen Voter Claims
Democratic Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar is pushing back on the Trump administration’s unfounded claims that close to 16,000 noncitizens are registered to vote in Nevada.
Here’s how the rumors began. Last month, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin claimed that the administration had identified “250,000 noncitizens registered to vote in just four states.” Mullin threatened to prosecute state election officials if they didn’t hand over sensitive voter roll data. Trump made the same claims during his primetime national address in July, during which he did little other than elevate old conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.
The administration arrived at this seemingly staggering number by comparing public voter lists in Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and California with immigration records. These numbers have not been substantiated.
In a July 13 letter to Aguilar, Mullin specifically said that in Nevada there could be as many as 15,903 noncitizens on the rolls. But, in a surprise to no one, the administration is unable to prove how it got these numbers.
In fact, DHS later admitted in private conversations with Aguilar that it was able to identify just 185 “potential” noncitizens on the rolls, according to emails records and a recording of an August 13 meeting between Aguilar’s office and DHS, obtained by the Nevada Independent.
Mullin’s big bombshell discovery is, of course, in keeping with the Trump administration’s continued efforts to sow seeds of doubt in the election system by perpetuating the myth that noncitizen voting is widespread and out of control.
“The Secretary of State’s Office will not risk disenfranchising eligible voters and ripping away their Constitutional right to vote without the highest confidence of their ineligibility,” Aguilar said in a statement to MS NOW.
In an interview with Democracy Docket, Aguilar said that “the fact that they are so flippant about a fundamental constitutional right is unsettling.”
“They are not sophisticated in their efforts to determine who is eligible to vote and who’s not, and that’s dangerous,” he added. “Their whole desire to create confusion, create chaos, create lack of confidence in the electoral process is all bullshit.”
Darline Graham Dodges 2020 Certification Questions
Darline Graham, the sister and Trump-backed successor of late-Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) who won the South Carolina Republican primary runoff this week against Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), dodged questions on Monday from MS NOW about the 2020 election.
During an interview, MS NOW’s Mychael Schnell asked Graham: “Senator, you just mentioned that you agree with your brother on everything except for one matter, that being illegal immigration, you’d go farther than him on that,” Schnell noted. “That being said, I’m curious, do you agree with him about the 2020 election, that Joe Biden was certified the winner of that election, was lawfully elected, and that you would’ve voted to certify the election, as your brother did?”
Here’s her Trumpian non answer.
“I think our election system is broken,” she said. “That’s why I think it’s so important that we get the SAVE America Act passed. That’s why I wanted to stay through recess to get that done.”
When pressed again, she simply ignored the question, planting her flag firmly in the camp of Trump’s election denialism.
In Other Election News:
TPM: Trump Gets Significant Early Win in Mail-In Ballot Case from Supreme Court
Star Tribune: Mike Lindell stops payment for primary election recount, calls terms ‘unlawful’
Los Angeles Times: “Will Trump interfere in the midterms? Democrats and their allies are preparing”
