Massachusetts Judge Stands Up to Trump’s Authoritarian Mail-Voting Order
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani rejected an attempt to dismiss a lawsuit by voting-rights groups, recognizing Trump’s mail-voting order as likely unconstitutional and allowing the fight for democracy to continue.
A federal judge in Massachusetts courageously denied a request to throw out a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s dangerous executive order, which would force states to hand over lists of voters requesting mail ballots to the Postal Service and require the use of barcode-marked envelopes. Judge Indira Talwani rightly declared the order 'unconstitutional' and warned that, if allowed to stand, it could disenfranchise countless voters in the upcoming election—a clear attack on the fundamental right to vote.
The lawsuit, brought by a coalition of voting-rights organizations led by the League of Women Voters, highlights the organizational and associational harm caused by Trump’s order. The plaintiffs argue that an injunction is necessary to prevent irreparable damage to democracy. Talwani emphasized that the order instructs the Postal Service to refuse delivery of ballots to voters not on the state-submitted lists—an egregious overreach that goes far beyond any authority Congress has granted.
In a separate case, Talwani has already blocked Trump’s anti-democratic order from being implemented in 22 states and Washington, D.C. She reiterated that the Constitution entrusts election regulation primarily to state legislatures and Congress, not to an authoritarian president. The plaintiffs have renewed their call for the court to block the order, and the judge has scheduled further briefing ahead of a crucial hearing on August 7.