The High Court had danced around a decision saying the Post office hasn’t set in place a plan
They have…..
A lower Federal court judge had ruled against Trump ‘s plan
(Judge Indira Talwani said the Postal Service appeared to be trying a haphazard “experiment” with a new rule that could result in valid ballots being tossed….)
Chief Justice Roberts seems to leaning against the Trump post office plan also
The supreme’s NEED To step up and protect millions of mailed ballots and had down a Strong rebuke to Trump’s latest effort to steal another election….
The Trump administration on Thursday asked the Supreme Court for permission to resume its efforts to restrict mail voting in the lead-up to the midterms.
Administration lawyers asked the justices to clear the way for a new rule that prohibits the U.S. Postal Service from delivering ballots to voters in states that do not share voter data with the federal agency. The rule would also require the agency to review ballot envelopes for compliance with new standards before accepting it.
In the emergency filing, Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that a lower court freeze on the plan would impose “serious irreparable harm on the federal government, the states themselves, and the voting public.”
The emergency request to the Supreme Court is the second time in recent weeks that the court has been asked to weigh in on efforts by President Trump’s mail ballot plans. Previously, a majority of the court said a legal challenge was premature because the administration had not yet finalized its plans to restrict mail voting.
But the Postal Service published its plans in August in the days before the Supreme Court’s ruling, and a lower court judge has since blocked key parts of the plan from going into effect for the November election.
The administration’s emergency appeal to the justices came hours after a federal judge in Massachusetts, during a hearing in the matter, expressed concerns that the plans could cause so much chaos in the coming elections that states would experience “major disenfranchisement.” Judge Indira Talwani had imposed a temporary block on the plan, which the administration had already appealed.
Rather than allow that legal process to play out, the administration is now taking the highly unusual step of trying to skip ahead and get immediate intervention from the Supreme Court.
It is not clear how the justices will greet the administration’s attempt to short-circuit the typical process, nor how quickly the court might act. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who handles emergency applications from that region of the country, signaled the court would deal with the issue on a speedy but not immediate timeline.
She did not issue an administrative stay, which the Trump administration had requested…..
….
Democratic state attorneys general, voting rights organizations and civil rights groups challenging the rule argue that it violates the Constitution, which gives states responsibility for regulating elections….
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.