Supreme Court Ruling on Mail-in Voting Could Add to Election Confusion

The Supreme Court issued an emergency order on Monday, allowing the Trump administration to proceed with plans to restrict mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections. Opponents argue that this will bring chaos to the election process as some states prepare to mail out ballots. Liz Landers spoke with Steve Vladeck, a constitutional law professor at Georgetown University Law Center, for more details.

The ruling allows the administration to move forward with President Trump's executive order, signed in March, directing the U.S. Postal Service to determine which voters should receive mail-in ballots and for the Department of Homeland Security to build a database of eligible U.S. citizens to vote. However, the ruling only applied to a lawsuit brought by states challenging the executive order, stating that they had brought their lawsuit too early. The court did not address the lawfulness of the executive order or the new Postal Service rule.

The executive order also bars the Postal Service from delivering ballots to individuals not on federal lists of eligible voters and directs DHS to create a list of eligible voters. These actions remain affected by the ruling, as the executive order and the Postal Service rule have not yet gone into effect. The Supreme Court merely paused one of the two injunctions against the executive order, leaving the status quo unchanged.

The ruling does not resolve the underlying issues, and litigation is likely to continue, possibly leading to another Supreme Court review. The ruling highlights that changing election rules too close to an election is problematic, as it confuses voters and hinders election administration.