U.S. Judge Blocks Trump's Mail-in Ballot Restriction Order Amid Legal Challenges
-
U.S. President Donald Trump has been pushing to implement his executive order restricting the use of mail-in ballots ahead of the November midterm elections, but a federal judge blocked it.
Compare 14 other versions
The Daily WireThe U.S. Supreme Court on Monday cleared the way for President Donald Trump to begin enforcing parts of an executive order aimed at restricting mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections.
VoxSo Trump wants to impose impossible deadlines on many states. But Monday’s decision does not actually hold that it is legal for him to do so. Indeed, the federal judge who initially blocked Trump’s executive order has already signaled that she is likely to block the USPS’s new rule. We will find out if the Supreme Court will allow Trump to sabotage voting by mail after that new decision makes its way back to the justices.
NBC NewsThe Trump administration told the Supreme Court the new regulations did not go as far as the executive order anticipated, saying the Postal Service “will not refuse to transmit ballots” even if senders are not included on a state list of registered voters.
The Guardian USGood morning. The US supreme court has sided with Donald Trump in his effort to crack down on mail-in voting, though it is unclear whether or not his administration will be able to take action before the midterm elections in November. The court’s justices voted 6-3 along ideological lines to lift an injunction that a judge in Massachusetts had placed in June on an executive order issued by the president. But a second injunction remains in place, and the ruling leaves room for legal challenges.
Fox NewsThe Supreme Court on Monday handed the Trump administration a victory, allowing it to enforce President Donald Trump’s "election integrity" executive order restricting mail-in voting ahead of the November midterms.
Washington TimesThe U.S. Postal Service unveiled new requirements for mail ballots less than two weeks before some states begin sending them and in time for the conservative majority of the Supreme Court to clear the way for President Donald Trump’s executive order limiting the method to be used in November’s elections.
NPR NewsThe Supreme Court has paused a lower court's ruling that blocked key directives from President Trump's executive order to restrict mail-in voting for this fall's midterm election in about two dozen states and Washington, D.C.
HuffPostWASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration Monday in a case over President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much can be implemented before the fast-approaching midterm elections.
PBS NewsHourSupreme Court clears the way for Trump mail voting order ahead of midterms The U.S. Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but time is running short to impose major changes with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.
The FederalistThe U.S. Supreme Court agreed to pause a lower court blockade on President Trump’s mail-in voting executive order on Monday. The vote was 6-3, with Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.
New York PostThe case involves the president’s March executive order directing the DHS to compile state-by-state lists of citizens who are at least 18 and eligible to vote in federal elections.
BreitbartMonday on MS NOW’s “The Last Word,” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) said the Supreme Court is “up to no good” for allowing the Trump administration to move forward with an order imposing restrictions on mail-in voting.
The HillDOJ asks judge to lift nationwide block on mail-in voting restrictions The Justice Department (DOJ) asked a federal judge in Massachusetts late Monday to lift a nationwide block on mail-in voting restrictions ahead of the November midterms. The DOJ wrote in a late-night filing that the Supreme Court’s ruling in a separate challenge to President Trump’s executive order “leaves no room for further dispute” in the…
New York TimesTrump Wants to Restrict Mail-In Voting. See Which States Rely on It The Most. Nearly 30 percent of voters nationwide use mail ballots. President Trump is seeking greater federal control of mail voting.
-
California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, vowed further 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," he said in a statement.
Compare 1 other version
New York PostNewsom said: “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.”
-
“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 majority wrote in an unsigned order.
Compare 5 other versions
Fox News"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," the majority wrote. "On that score, time will tell."
NBC News“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 court said in a the unsigned ruling.
The Daily Wire“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 court wrote. “But the Order itself does not harm the States, so the District Court lacked jurisdiction to bar the Government from trying to implement it.”
The FederalistThe majority went on to note that its ruling on the administration’s application “does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful.” While “time will tell” on that point, the justices affirmed that “the Order itself does not harm the States, so the District Court lacked jurisdiction to bar the Government from trying to implement it.”
USA Today"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 majority's decision stated. The court's three liberal justices dissented.
-
The decision leaves the door open to judges intervening at a later date, especially as regards any restrictions imposed for the coming midterm elections. On Aug. 21, while the case was pending, the Postal Service issued its final regulation that would enforce parts of the executive order.
Compare 1 other version
Washington TimesDespite the high court’s initial clearance of the order, it did not decide on the constitutionality of the new regulation- only on whether the challenge was premature when Democratic-controlled states persuaded a federal judge in Boston to suspend them in June. A second ruling from the same judge would prevent the Postal Service from implementing any procedural changes before this year’s midterms and would likely need to be nullified, as well.
14 details only one outlet reported
Independent claims that didn't surface elsewhere in our corpus. Treat as supplementary — not corroborated across outlets.
-
01 New York Post The California governor said in a statement late Monday he will launch another lawsuit against the federal government to try to block what he claimed were “Orwellian rules.”
-
02 Fox News The unsigned majority opinion did not decide whether the executive order itself is lawful. Instead, the court concluded that the administration was likely to prevail on its argument that the states’ challenge was premature because they had not yet suffered a sufficiently concrete injury.
-
03 The Guardian US How have rights organisations reacted? The president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Derrick Johnson, said: “Let this ruling be a reminder that democracy is never, ever guaranteed. We have to fight for it, we have to fight to keep it and we have to protect the rights we do have within it … they are trying to do everything they possibly can to make it difficult for you to vote.”
-
04 USA Today On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court handed him a win, lifting that judicial order, but other challenges remain.
-
05 The Hill Democratic governors react to Supreme Court ruling on mail-in voting: ‘States run elections, not Donald Trump’ Democratic governors are expressing their dissatisfaction with the Supreme Court’s Monday decision to lift a lower court’s block on the Trump administration’s executive order restricting mail-in ballot voting. New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill criticized the ruling as a “terrible decision” in a social media post.  “States run elections, not Donald Trump,” she wrote. “I will…
-
06 NBC News Hero lifeguard rushes in to save own family 01:15 Police rush into Uber to chase fleeing suspect 01:36 49ers Owner Arrested in Prostitution Sting 01:47 Mystery unfolding underground in New York City 01:19 People in Gary, Indiana without power for 13 days 01:52 Now Playing In win for Trump, Supreme Court backs restrictions on mail-in ballots 02:12 UP NEXT Ten of thousands evacuated from Nevada wildfire 02:10 Out-of-control wildfire forces evacuations 01:57 Good News: College football players surprised with scholarships 01:59 Inside the global humanoid robot competition in China 01:54 Hiker speaks out after violent attack 01:36 E-bike injuries surge in kids and teens 02:18 NFL player’s home burglarized 01:16 New questions as Harry and Meghan prepare to return to the U.K. 01:35 U.S. wages economic battles against Iran and Canada 01:00 Good News: Grandson surprises grandparents during vow renewal for 60th anniversary 03:07 Serena Williams to play with Carlos Alcaraz in return to US Open 01:56 U.S. and Canada trade war intensifies with new tariffs 02:02 Deadly heat, dangerous storms put millions at risk 01:59 Small plane makes emergency landing into ocean 01:30
-
07 New York Times Supreme Court Ruling on Mail-in Voting Could Add to Election Confusion The limits on mail-in voting may not go into effect by November, with at least one state vowing to sue. But some states and experts warned about further voter confusion.
-
08 NPR News But with the start of absentee voting for the midterms just weeks away, legal and practical hurdles loom over whether the U.S. Postal Service and other federal agencies can finish carrying out Trump's directives.
-
09 Vox On Monday, the Supreme Court’s Republican majority allowed that order to go into effect. All three of the Court’s Democrats dissented.
-
10 Breitbart Host Lawrence O’Donnell said, “Senator, what was your reaction to the White House decision today?”
-
11 Washington Times In an unsigned order, the justices said the district court meddled in executive branch deliberations, preventing the president from implementing his election integrity agenda.
-
12 The Federalist The administration appealed Talwani’s injunction to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals but was rejected. The government did, however, score a win in a separate challenge to the order in a case before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. The D.C.-based court ruled late last month that challengers’ lawsuit was unreviewable at that time because the named agencies hadn’t implemented their official rules as required by the president’s order.
-
13 HuffPost The Supreme Court’s conservative majority didn’t decide the legality of Trump’s order, instead ruling that states who sued did not have the legal right to challenge it.
-
14 The Daily Wire Monday’s decision is an interim victory for Trump but does not resolve the order’s underlying legality, CNBC reported.
Fact Corroboration
Which sources independently confirm the same facts. Hover a claim to see its sources, or a source to see what it corroborates.
Coverage by Perspective
Source Similarity
Connections show how similarly each outlet covered this story. Thicker lines = more similar framing.
Sources (15)
- huffpost
- pbs
- nypost
- nyt
- dailywire
- foxnews
- breitbart
- federalist
- npr
- thehill
- usatoday
- nbc
- guardian
- vox
- washtimes