Supreme Court rejects Trump mail ballot restrictions ahead of Nevada midterms

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday rejected President Donald Trump’s bid to restrict mail ballots for the midterm elections, capping a flurry of last-minute legal action with voting already underway.

The decision allows states to continue sending out mail ballots under the same processes they’ve used for years.

Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas publicly dissented from the brief order.

The Trump administration had asked the court, once again at the center of a roiling political controversy, to clear the way for restrictions before the pivotal November contests for control of Congress. The case has major implications because nearly one-third of the country votes by mail.

Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar touted the order. The state was one of 24 states and Washington, D.C. that sued over the restrictions.

“Today’s ruling is a victory for voters across Nevada and the country who rely on voting by mail,” said the state’s chief election officer in a statement. “This is not a party issue — across party lines and rural and urban communities, mail ballots give voters a way to make their voices heard.”

Justices’ decision avoids midterm chaos

The Supreme Court majority did not detail its reasoning, as is typical on the high court’s emergency docket. Alito, meanwhile, said in the dissent that the Postal Service “has broad authority to regulate the mail” and likely does have the power to enforce Trump’s restrictions.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed that the restrictions should not go into effect for the midterms but indicated he might rule in favor of the Trump administration if the issue comes back before the court.

Election officials have said there was simply no way to carry out a complete overhaul in the weeks before the midterms. Indeed, Alabama, North Carolina and Wisconsin began sending mail ballots to voters over the past week while the new system was still not active.

The Trump administration plan would require states to adopt a uniform envelope style and submit lists of eligible voters to an online portal. The Postal Service could refuse to deliver ballots to states that didn’t comply.

A whistleblower report, though, said the postal system’s requirements could lead to millions of mail ballots never being sent, because the portal wasn’t properly built and a single bar code error could result in an entire batch of ballots being tossed out.

Democratic state officials and voting rights groups challenged the restrictions in court, arguing that the president has no constitutional authority to set election rules that would “virtually eliminate mail voting on the eve of a major election.”

Lower courts agreed and blocked Trump’s plan, including a preliminary injunction issued by a judge nominated by the president.

But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that federal control of the Postal Service allows them to set rules for mail ballot handling and that compliance was possible.

The federal government won an early procedural decision at the Supreme Court, but the justices pointedly did not decide the legality of the plan.

Trump has long opposed mail voting and falsely blamed it for his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden, even though he often uses that method to cast his own ballot, including as recently as this year.

Aguilar described it as a Trump effort to disrupt November’s midterm election. Nevada voters living in the state are expected to receive mail ballots beginning Oct. 5.

“Here in Nevada, we will continue standing up for states’ constitutional authority to administer elections and for the ballot access eligible voters deserve,” he said. “Elections are run by people —our neighbors and friends — not politicians in Washington. Nevada election officials remain focused on providing safe, secure and accessible elections for voters this fall.”

Review-Journal staff writer Ricardo Torres-Cortez contributed to this report.