By J.C. Bruce
President Donald Trump’s absurd scheme to use the U.S. Postal Service as a tool to disrupt mail-in voting in the midterm election has been shot down by the U.S. Supreme Court.
This means that mail-in ballots for the Nov. 3 election can proceed as usual, a crucial win for voting rights as a full third of all American voters choose to use the mail to cast their votes.
Trump had urged the high court to overturn a Boston District Court Judge’s injunction that halted the implementation of Postal Service rules that would have created chaos in the election, now only seven weeks away.
Trump’s scheme would have required states to turn over their lists of eligible voters to the federal government, redesign the envelopes for mail-in ballots with new bar codes, and allow the Postal Service to reject potentially tens of thousands of ballots for any glitches in this last-minute proposal.
Massachusetts Federal Judge Indira Talwani was not having any of that when she told the government:
“Having considered this series of hurdles for officials against the backdrop of an impending election, and mindful of the fact that any minor malfunction will result in the denial of mail ballots, the court concludes that disenfranchisement for plaintiff organizations’ members, regardless of residence, is practically inevitable.”
In an unsigned opinion, the Supreme Court agreed.
To a certain degree, though, Trump may have accomplished part of his aim to suppress voter turnout just by casting doubt about the integrity of voting by mail, despite numerous studies showing it is safe.
But it was always clear that there was a huge constitutional hurdle Trump faced in trying to inject the federal government into elections which, clearly, are spelled out in the Constitution as the duty of the states.
Solicitor General Dean John Sauer’s absurd arguments to the contrary apparently did not pass muster with the Supremes. He had claimed that unless the Post Office was given the right to play hall monitor in the election the “federal mails will be used to perpetrate voter fraud—a particularly pernicious species of fraud that dilutes the votes of lawful voters, prevents election results from reflecting the will of the American people, and undermines ‘public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process.’”
A lot of gall there, given the only party trying to commit fraud in this election was Trump and his flunkies like Sauer.
The court majority offered a terse view of that line of reasoning:
The government, it said, was “unlikely to succeed on the merits.”
Reaction among Democrats was immediate:
California Gov. Gavin Newsom hailed the court’s rejection of Trump’s attempt to “rig the election” and urged voters: “Let’s show up this November and take Congress back!”
Previous stories:
Trump still tries to disrupt mail-in voting. Will the Supreme Court let him get away with it?
Curses! Foiled again! Federal judge--one more time--blocks Trump mail-in ballot scheme
Thanks for your support
Since this newsletter was launched a year ago, hundreds of thousands of subscribers have joined the Tropic Press community, making this one of the fastest-growing publications of its kind.
Our goal here is to reach as many voters as possible, so that we can increase engagement in the political process and,hopefully, raise interest in voting this coming November.
If you are encountering this newsletter for the first time, please consider subscribing. If you are already a subscriber, consider upgrading your subscription to help this work continue.
Regardless, every person you share this with is one more potential vote for change.
Please share and help us make Florida — and America — better for all of us.
Thanks.
J.C. Bruce
Common sense prevailed at the Supreme Court! It gives me some hope that their future decisions will show some impartiality and concern for Americans and not just the hooligan in the White House!
Democracy won this round.