Blue states warn of chaos and abuse as SCOTUS considers Trump’s mail-in voting rules

Nearly two dozen states led by California warned against the weaponization of the USPS in upcoming elections if President Trump is allowed to enforce a voter-verification and ballot-interception program.WASHINGTON (CN) — Democratic states warned the Supreme Court on Monday against allowing President Donald Trump to enforce an executive order upending mail-in voting ahead of November’s midterm elections.Led by California, officials in 23 states and the District of Columbia urged the justices to keep Trump’s order on pause, arguing that the proposed changes posed a high risk of errors and a limited window to correct them.“[Trump’s] rushed effort to change the rules of mail voting on the eve of the November midterms risks disenfranchising a substantial number of voters — an intolerable risk that weighs heavily against a stay,” the states wrote.The “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections” order directs the federal government to create lists of eligible voters in each state and instruct the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to verified voters.It also requires mail ballots to be used with secure envelopes featuring unique tracking barcodes. Federal funding could be withheld from states and localities that do not comply.Democratic states questioned whether the program could be implemented as soon as this month. It would require the Postal Service to create a portal for states to upload voter rolls, scan ballot barcodes to verify voter eligibility and withhold delivery of ballots for voters not found in the database.“Even with ‘heroic efforts’ by state and local officials in the coming weeks, the EO’s rollout would be ‘disastrous from a practical perspective,’” the states wrote.Democratic states argued the Postal Service’s voter lists would inevitably contain errors because voter rolls change constantly. They also said flawed federal citizenship records, changes in voter residency and unreliable federal address data would contribute to inaccuracies in the citizenship lists required by the order.“Voters would likely be disenfranchised, as officials inevitably make mistakes in rushing to formulate new voter lists and roll out untested technologies to scan ballots for eligibility determinations,” the states wrote. “And states may not learn that individuals have been denied ballots in time to send them replacements before the election or inform them that they will need to vote in person.”Democratic states argued that even if it was possible to revise their voting systems before November, Trump does not have authority to grant USPS such far-reaching new powers and responsibilities.“Defendants and intervenors are also wrong in suggesting that ‘the president’s ability to oversee the executive branch’ gives him carte blanche to direct executive officials to engage in any form of rulemaking, no matter how plainly unconstitutional,” the Democratic states wrote. “The duty to ‘take care that the laws be faithfully executed’ allows the president to administer laws duly enacted by Congress, not to usurp powers exclusively entrusted to states and Congress.”The states also warned against turning USPS into a partisan instrument. And if federal officials start intercepting ballots sent by states to voters, Democratic officials argued that voters may begin to question whether USPS will refuse to deliver voters’ ballots to state officials.“There would also be a temptation on the part of the federal government to abuse this new authority for partisan ends,” the states wrote. “Even the appearance of such abuse could have a devastating impact on voters’ confidence in the integrity of elections.”A Massachusetts court blocked key portions of Trump’s order in June at the request of Democratic officials. The ruling applies only to the November elections, allowing the administration to continue preparing the program while the case proceeds.Trump filed an emergency appeal last week asking the Supreme Court to lift the injunction. A dozen Republican-led states that intervened in the case separately urged the justices to fully enforce the order, arguing they have a concrete interest in ensuring mail ballots are securely delivered and counted.The Justice Department said the order has not yet been implemented by the relevant agencies. It argued the lower court overstepped by blocking the directives based solely on the executive order before any agency action had occurred.“This premature injunction imposes serious irreparable harm on the federal government,” Trump wrote in his emergency application. “Even if the agencies’ implementation plans end up being entirely lawful, there is not enough time to obtain ordinary appellate relief from the injunction in order to carry them out before the November election, especially given that any such plans will need to be implemented well before November given the timing of election procedures concerning voter-roll verification and mail voting.”Trump has repeatedly elevated concerns about the legitimacy of elections in recent weeks, including a primetime address from the Oval Office. Noncitizen voting is rare, but the president continues to cite the issue as justification for voting changes ahead of the November elections.Alongside his executive order, Trump has demanded that congressional Republicans take drastic measures such as ending the filibuster to pass a long-stalled bill clamping down on U.S. elections.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads