The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday laid the groundwork to potentially implement President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in ballot access across the country.
The ruling names 23 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia that sued the federal government over Trump’s proposed restrictions, which designate that the U.S. Postal Service must develop rules under which it would deliver mail-in and absentee ballots only for voters who appear on an eligibility list.
Harris County Attorney Abbie Kamin filed an amicus brief earlier this month, joining California in its lawsuit. She said Tuesday she’s concerned about the recent SCOTUS decision.
It’s complicated, of course, because mail ballots for the November 3 election will be distributed in some states as early as September 4. The Associated Press reported that the U.S. Postal Service laid out how it would implement the order last week, but noted time is running short to impose major changes.
“The Supreme Court’s conservative majority didn’t decide the legality of Trump’s order, instead ruling that states that sued did not have the legal right to challenge it,” according to an AP report published late Monday. “While the emergency order is not final, it does have the potential to create chaos around voting across the country, with Trump often questioning the integrity of elections and the nation’s highest court against the possible arbiter of a political controversy.”
Kamin affirmed that Monday’s unsigned order from the Supreme Court is “not a ruling on the order’s constitutionality; it just says the case is not yet ready for a decision.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of three who dissented, said the opinion represents a total lack of situational awareness and the Supreme Court has created a “Kafkaesque nightmare” of delays and confusion for election administrators and millions of eligible voters.
Kamin said the Constitution and longstanding laws of the nation give states and Congress, not the President, the authority to run elections.
“There’s a reason for that. This is an unconstitutional attempt at a power grab, where the President is trying to withhold mail ballots from eligible voters by hijacking the USPS. We remain confident the law is on our side, and we will keep fighting to make sure every eligible voter can cast their ballot without interference,” she said in a statement.
The controversy stems from a Trump order on March 31 that directs federal agencies to create state-specific lists of individuals verified as U.S. citizens and eligible to vote. The postal service would then be given authority to refuse delivery of ballots to people who aren’t on the list.
But the databases created via the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Act are flawed, Kamin has said, noting that the Texas Secretary of State’s Office had to reinstate some of the 2,724 registered voters who were identified as potential noncitizens.
“The concept that the postal service, at the direction of the President, could intercept mail ballots and refuse to deliver them to be counted is illegal,” Kamin told the Houston Press in an August 4 interview. “The attempt to hijack the postal service to disenfranchise voters is despicable. This is an intentional effort to interfere with elections across this country.”
An injunction was issued by a U.S. district judge in Massachusetts on June 25 and Trump appealed to the Supreme Court. Those who support Trump’s executive order say it protects the integrity of mail voting and prevents noncitizens from casting ballots.
