The Supreme Court has blocked Donald Trump’s controversial plans to alter mail-in voting—over the dissents of the court’s two most right-wing members.
In an unsigned order, the court determined that the government was “unlikely to succeed on the merits” of the case, which stemmed from challenges by Democratic state attorneys general and voting rights groups. The one-paragraph order did not elaborate.
In March, Trump signed an executive order mandating that the U.S. Postal Service create a series of new rules for mail-in voting. The order required each state to send lists of eligible voters to the Postal Service, which would be prohibited from delivering ballots to anyone not on those lists. The order also called for adding tracking barcodes to ballot envelopes.
In the court’s ruling, none of Trump’s three appointees—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett—dissented.
In his concurrence, Kavanaugh said that while the government might ultimately win the issue, “state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the election.”
But Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, appointees of George W. Bush and George H. W. Bush, respectively, dissented.
Alito, 76, wasn’t swayed by logistical concerns about implementing the changes.
“The government has a strong interest in enforcing the rule, and implementing it will also ‘enhance the visibility of Federal Ballot Mail’ in order to better detect election fraud,” he wrote. “On the other side of the balance, the plaintiff States invoke the practical effects of implementing the rule close to the midterm elections. I take that problem very seriously, but it is not enough to convince me to deny the application.”
Alito later said the court itself was partly responsible for the timing issue.
“Not only was the Government subject to months of premature litigation and a series of injunctions that this Court later determined were likely issued without jurisdiction, the Government had to wait nearly another full month for this Court to issue its decision so holding,” he wrote. “The plaintiff States cannot claim the timing of the rule tilts the equities in their favor when they, and courts hearing their claims, are responsible for so much of the delay.”
Alito and 78-year-old Thomas are the court’s oldest justices and the ones most consistently in Trump’s corner. In the past year, they sided with the administration on the president’s hallmark policies of tariffs, birthright citizenship, and his attempt to fire a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. Trump ultimately lost all three cases.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, whose state was among those that fought Trump’s executive order in court, applauded the ruling.
“Today is a good day for democracy, the rule of law, and the American people looking to exercise their Constitutional right to vote,” he said. “Finally, fifty days out, and the American people have certainty when it comes to our country’s electoral process: Voting is safe, vote-by-mail is accessible to any and all who need it.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Beast.
This is a developing story and will be updated.
