Folks, I almost spilled my coffee reading this one – a federal judge in Boston has temporarily blocked the US Postal Service from carrying out a plan that could limit mail voting, which was issued under an executive order from President Trump. I mean, it’s not like we didn’t see this coming, but still, it’s always exciting to watch the drama unfold. The plan, which was supposed to go into effect soon, would have required states to submit lists of their mail voters to the US Postal Service and use special bar-coded envelopes to facilitate automated tracking. Sounds like a real party, if you ask me.
So, Democratic states and voter advocacy groups challenged the rules and were granted a temporary restraining order for two weeks late Thursday night. I guess you could say they were pretty quick on the draw. Judge Indira Talwani wrote in her ruling that the USPS is basically refusing to send mail ballots to eligible voters unless states or local election officials submit their mail ballot envelopes and return envelopes and receive advance approval from the USPS. Bless their hearts, it sounds like a real bureaucratic nightmare.
The challengers are likely to win on their claims that the rule is unconstitutional and that the USPS lacks authority to issue it in the first place. I mean, it’s not like the Trump administration hasn’t been known to push the boundaries of executive power before. Talwani also wrote that the plaintiff states have neither time nor funds to design new mail ballots, seek approval of the new designs, order production of mail ballots, update their own election management systems, train election officials to use the USPS portal, and upload citizen data to the portal, all before the midterms. You can’t make this stuff up, folks – it’s like they’re trying to make it impossible for people to vote.
The Justice Department argued that the regulatory change was “modest” and USPS had the statutory authority to undertake it. Modest? Really? It sounds like a pretty big deal to me. The administration says the requirements are aimed at facilitating law enforcement investigations, but I’m not sure I buy that. Somewhere in Atlanta, a producer thought this sounded terrifying, and now we’ve got a big ol’ mess on our hands.
The Thursday ruling is the latest legal volley in what is expected to be a fast-moving court battle over Trump’s proposed plan. The Supreme Court removed a previous court order issued by Talwani that had blocked agencies from carrying out aspects of the March executive order in the two-dozen states that are suing over it. The high court’s ruling did not acknowledge the final rule that USPS released Friday night, as those were not part of the record of the appeal before the justices. This latest ruling stems from revised complaints that opponents filed in response to the final rule. It’s all getting pretty complicated, if you ask me.
In the end, it’s all just a big game of legal Ping-Pong, with the fate of mail voting hanging in the balance. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what happens next. But one thing’s for sure – it’s going to be a wild ride. And who knows, maybe by the time it’s all sorted out, we’ll have a whole new set of problems to deal with. After all, as the saying goes, “when it rains, it pours” – and right now, it’s pouring lawsuits and executive orders. So, grab a cup of coffee, sit back, and enjoy the show, folks!
Armchair patriot. Believes in the free market, cold beer, and that there’s always a guy named George behind every CNN segment.
Former remote-throwing champion turned #1 couch commentator on liberal panic in the media. Born in Texas (or so his mug says), he earned a degree in Fake Newsology & Beer Philosophy from YouTube University.
