Washington AG criticizes Supreme Court ruling allowing Trump mail voting order to proceed
OFM:August.25/2026.Washington Attorney General Nick Brown criticized a U.S. Supreme Court decision that allows the Trump administration to begin implementing parts of an executive order restricting mail voting while a multistate legal challenge continues.
The high court on Monday put on hold a federal judge’s June injunction that had blocked the order’s enforcement in Washington, 22 other states and Washington, D.C.
The court did not rule on whether the executive order itself is lawful, instead finding the states’ challenge was filed too soon because the administration had not yet implemented the policies.
“The court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the government to implement the order will necessarily be lawful,” the Supreme Court wrote in its unsigned opinion.
Trump signed the executive order March 31. It directs the Department of Homeland Security to develop lists of people eligible to vote in each state and calls for the U.S. Postal Service to establish procedures allowing it to send mail ballots only to people on federally approved lists.
The order also threatens states and election officials with potential criminal prosecution and the loss of federal funding if they do not comply, according to the coalition’s lawsuit.
A federal judge in Massachusetts had ruled in June that the president did not have the constitutional authority to direct changes to how states administer federal elections.
Monday’s ruling pauses that injunction as the case proceeds.
A separate nationwide injunction, issued in a related lawsuit brought by voting-rights groups, remains in effect for now and blocks the Postal Service from implementing certain mail-ballot provisions of the executive order.
Brown said Washington remains prepared to challenge any federal actions taken under the order.
“A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court does not seem to recognize the grave threat the president’s actions pose for our democracy,” Brown said in a statement.
“There is nothing hypothetical about his intent to illegally suppress legitimate votes.”
Brown said the decision “does not bless the substance of the president’s actions,” adding that states “must wait slightly longer to challenge them.”
“States control elections, not the president,” Brown said.
The ruling comes less than three months before the Nov. 3 midterm election, as states begin preparing to send mail ballots to eligible voters. SCOTUSblog’s case report and CBS News’ summary of the decision detail the decision and the remaining nationwide injunction.
Source:-KOMO news, Forth news, Seattle times.
See less