Washington • The Supreme Court on Monday blocked a Trump administration plan to dramatically change how Americans vote by mail in the lead-up to the midterm elections, a major loss for President Donald Trump, who has long claimed without evidence that fraud is rampant in mail voting.
The ruling was a resounding win for Democratic-led states and voting rights groups, which had argued that the plan was unconstitutional and an existential threat to the democratic process.
The Trump administration’s efforts, they had said, would introduce chaos and confusion as early voting gears up in many states.
Still, the weekslong legal tussle over the issue may have sown its own kind of confusion, a victory of sorts for Trump as he seeks to cast doubt on the integrity of the vote in an election his party might lose.
Utah’s top election official responds
Utah’s top election official, Republican Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, has been a critic of Trump’s order since it was issued, dubbing it “nonsensical.” If the high court had allowed it to stand, Henderson previously said, Utah was preparing its own lawsuit.
The order would have presented a challenge for running elections in red Utah, where every active, registered voter automatically receives their ballot in the mail. For June’s primary, The Salt Lake Tribune found, approximately 95% of ballots cast had been delivered to voters in the mail.
“That sound you hear is the collective sigh of relief from election officials around the country,” Henderson wrote on social media Monday, reacting to the ruling. “This is a huge win for voters
— Emily Anderson Stern, The Salt Lake Tribune
The majority provided a one-paragraph explanation for the ruling, writing that the government was “unlikely to succeed on the merits.”
The order was unsigned, which is typical in emergency rulings. It gave no vote count. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence. Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.
The battle over the Trump administration’s plan to change mail-in voting has played out over the last few weeks in a dizzying series of legal developments, even as states began sending out ballots.
Trump administration lawyers had urged the justices to step in and clear the way for its plan to use the U.S. Postal Service to screen ballot envelopes after they are submitted by state elections officials. The new rules would require states to submit lists of voters approved to receive mail ballots. The Postal Service would then deliver mail ballots only to the voters on the lists.
The plan would also require states to use an envelope approved by the Postal Service, including a unique bar code for each voter. Some states have argued that redesigning ballots so close to the election would be challenging or perhaps impossible, causing delays.
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.