Flat-selection ballot held for Wang Fuk Court owners

The US Supreme Court on Monday declined to support President Donald Trump's attempt to impose restrictions on mail ballots for the upcoming midterm elections. This ruling comes just days after the voting process had already begun in several states. The decision means that states can continue to send out mail ballots using the same established processes that have been in place for nearly a third of all votes cast so far.

The ruling represents a significant defeat for Trump, who has often emphasized the importance of election integrity, despite a lack of substantial evidence suggesting fraud with mail ballots. The court majority reasoned that the administration's push to implement these restrictions this year is unlikely to succeed in court. Two justices, Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, dissented in their written opinions.

The Trump administration had requested the court to approve the restrictions ahead of the crucial November contests to determine control of Congress. Alito contended that the Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail and likely possesses the power to enforce the proposed restrictions. Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred that the restrictions should not take effect for the midterms but suggested he might rule in favor of the administration if the issue arises again in the future.

Mail ballots are currently being sent to voters in several states, including Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin, despite the new system not being fully operational. The Trump administration's plan would require states to use a uniform envelope style and submit lists of eligible voters to an online portal, with the Postal Service potentially refusing to deliver ballots to states that didn't comply.

Election officials have emphasized that a complete overhaul in the weeks prior to the midterms is impractical. In a statement, Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin all began sending mail ballots to voters within the past week while their new systems were still in development. The administration's proposed changes would have been particularly disruptive in states that rely heavily on mail-in ballots.

Democratic election officials and voting rights groups vehemently opposed the restrictions, arguing that the president lacks constitutional authority to set election rules that would effectively eliminate mail voting on the eve of a major election. The League of Women Voters, a plaintiff in the case, described the proposal as an extraordinary attempt to interfere with voting and warned that it could have caused chaos in the elections.

Despite being a regular mail ballot user himself, Trump has consistently opposed mail voting and has falsely claimed it contributed to his 2020 election defeat against Democrat Joe Biden.