Democratic governors erupted after the Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major procedural victory in his push to tighten mail-in voting rules ahead of the November midterms. The justices lifted a lower-court order that had blocked the administration from moving forward with key parts of Trump’s executive order. Democratic governors responded with accusations of voter disenfranchisement, vows of fresh lawsuits, and demands that the federal government stay out of state election systems.
The Monday ruling doesn’t settle whether Trump’s order is constitutional, but it removes one barrier that had stopped federal agencies from preparing to carry it out. The dispute focuses on a March executive order directing the federal government to create state citizenship lists and directing the U.S. Postal Service to initiate rulemaking that would limit ballot delivery to only voters appearing on approved mail-in and absentee participation lists. Twenty-three Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia sued to stop the administration.
New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill was among the Democratic officials who immediately attacked the ruling. She called it a “terrible decision” and accused the president of intruding on authority she says is reserved only for the states. “States run elections, not Donald Trump,” Sherrill wrote. “I will do everything I can to protect New Jerseyans’ right to vote — by mail and in person.”
As The Hill reported, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority concluded that the states had sued before the administration’s plans had produced a concrete injury. The decision allows federal agencies to continue planning while litigation over the resulting restrictions proceeds. The three liberal justices dissented, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson writing that the ruling “lets another shoe drop in the Kafkaesque nightmare that our precedents have been steadily creating.”
Trump’s March 31st executive order directs the Department of Homeland Security, working with the Social Security Administration, to compile lists of confirmed U.S. citizens who will be 18 or older by the next federal election. It also directs the Postal Service to initiate rulemaking that includes proposed requirements for secure ballot envelopes carrying unique Intelligent Mail barcodes and limiting or halting transmission of ballots for any voters who are not included on state-specific participation lists. The order further tells the Justice Department to prioritize investigations and potential prosecutions involving ballots issued to people deemed ineligible to vote in federal elections.
The Supreme Court’s opinion stressed that the ruling was limited to whether the states had brought their challenge too soon. “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 majority wrote. “On that score, time will tell.” A separate injunction affecting the Postal Service remains in place, leaving additional litigation underway as election officials prepare for November.
California Governor Gavin Newsom reacted in all caps and promised that his state would return to court. “WOW. The Supreme Court just let the Trump Admin move ahead (for now) with its plan to disenfranchise voters across the country,” Newsom wrote. “California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented.” California’s attorney general’s office led the multistate challenge to Trump’s order.
"*" indicates required fields
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro issued his own threat of further litigation, saying the state would “see the Trump Administration in court.” Pennsylvania was part of the coalition that challenged the order, and Shapiro insisted that the state would continue administering its election under its existing rules while the fight continues. “In the meantime, I’ll keep defending Pennsylvanians’ right to free, fair, and secure elections,” he wrote.
Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont called the ruling “disappointing,” while acknowledging that the justices had not decided whether Trump’s plan can legally be carried out. “SCOTUS allowed the Trump Administration to begin planning for the executive order, but it did not rule on whether carrying it out would be lawful,” Lamont wrote. He then declared, “We are not handing over control of our elections to the Trump Administration, and Donald Trump’s ongoing campaign of spreading misinformation to undermine public trust in our elections will not succeed.”