A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's push to enforce new mail-in voting restrictions across 23 states on Saturday, preserving an earlier court order that found key parts of the president's directive unconstitutional.
The first US circuit court of appeals in Boston, ruling 2-1, declined to pause a lower court injunction that Democratic-led states secured in late June. The administration had argued that because federal agencies were still developing implementation details, any legal challenge was premature and should wait.
The appeals panel disagreed, noting that Trump's executive order imposed firm deadlines requiring states to coordinate with federal officials and adopt new voting procedures before the September and November elections. The court found that states had no realistic choice but to respond immediately to the order's requirements.
The underlying executive order, signed by Trump in March, directs the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of confirmed US citizens eligible to vote in each state and share those lists with election officials. It also instructs the US Postal Service to deliver mail-in ballots only to voters on state-approved lists and tells the Justice Department to investigate and prosecute state and local election officials who issue ballots to people deemed ineligible.
USPS has already begun moving to implement the directive by proposing new rules that would require states to provide ballot names and barcodes to the agency.
District Judge Indira Talwani, the Obama-appointed jurist who initially blocked the order, concluded that the president lacked authority to compel the Department of Homeland Security to compile voter eligibility lists for state use. She also found that USPS had no legal basis to adopt regulations governing mail-in voting procedures.
Talwani further ruled that Trump could not use the order as a tool to intimidate local election officials into relying on incomplete federal citizenship databases, under threat of criminal prosecution.
The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of 23 states and the District of Columbia, led by California, Massachusetts, Nevada and Washington. A federal judge in Washington DC had separately rejected a similar Democratic challenge to the order before Talwani's ruling.
The administration has signaled it may seek intervention from the Supreme Court if the first circuit decision stands. The mail-in voting order represents one element of Trump's broader agenda to overhaul election administration. He has also made passage of a restrictive voting package called the Save America Act a legislative priority, and courts have previously blocked another executive order requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote and limiting mail-in ballot counting.
Trump has long pushed for tighter mail-in voting rules and has repeatedly claimed without evidence that widespread voter fraud cost him the 2020 election. Under the Constitution, states retain primary authority over federal election administration.
Author James Rodriguez: "The appeals court's decision reflects a practical reality that judges recognize: states can't navigate moving targets, and courts have legitimate power to prevent constitutional harm even when bureaucratic machinery is still grinding."
Comments