At the core of the issue is the administration executive order that requires states to send their voter rolls to the U.S. Postal Service for mail service for mail-in ballots. The USPS would then cross-check with DHS and Social Security records to ensure each of the names and addresses were eligible to vote before mailing them a ballot.
Obviously, the blue states -Democrat States- are refusing to comply with the USPS rule, the reason is simple. A significant number of the blue state registered voters are not eligible voters (illegal aliens etc.) If the states allowed cross-checking of their voter rolls the American people would see just how many illegal voters are registered; this would significantly reshape the U.S. election. The scale of the issue is up for debate.
That said, the anxiety forms the baseline of opposition where blue states are suing in every court possible to stop the postal service requirement. The Trump executive order also directs the Postal Service to block delivery of mail-in ballots entirely from states that refuse to share voter lists with the federal government.
Today the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 [RULING HERE] that lifted one of the lower court injunctions that was filed as a lawsuit in Massachusetts. The court ruled that Boston-based Judge Indira Talwani (Obama appointee) engaged in “a string of speculations to find this suit justiciable.”
[SOURCE]
The three DEI justices (Brown-Jackson, Kagan, Sotomayor) all dissented from the majority opinion, because of course they did.
WASHINGTON – […] More than 20 blue states sued to block Trump’s order, saying it threatens to upend their planning for the midterms in November and intrudes on their authority to administer elections.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority said those states lacked standing in part because it’s unclear just how the administration will implement the order, although the administration on Friday released a final Postal Service rule addressing more details.
“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. On that score, time will tell. But the Order itself does not harm the States, so the District Court lacked jurisdiction to bar the Government from trying to implement it,” the court said in its unsigned majority ruling.
The high court faulted the judge who issued the injunction, Boston-based Obama appointee Indira Talwani, for engaging in “a string of speculations to find this suit justiciable.”
Voting rights and civil rights groups are also suing over Trump’s plan. Earlier this month, Talwani granted a separate injunction in that case blocking the Postal Service from complying with Trump’s order. It’s unclear how that litigation will be impacted by the high court’s order. (read more)
