Federal Appeals Court Upholds Democracy, Rejects Trump Administration's Attempt to Suppress Mail-In Voting in 23 States
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.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals has rebuffed the Justice Department’s effort to reinstate a Trump executive order that would have imposed harsh restrictions on mail-in voting in 23 states and Washington, D.C., defending the constitutional rights of millions of voters.
In a significant victory for voting rights and democracy, a three-judge panel of the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston ruled 2-1 on Saturday that the Justice Department could not halt a district-court injunction blocking a draconian March executive order from the Trump administration. This order sought to tighten mail-in voting procedures in 23 states and the District of Columbia, a move widely seen as an attempt to disenfranchise marginalized communities and suppress voter turnout. The injunction, issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on June 25, found that key provisions of the order were unconstitutional, reaffirming the judiciary’s role as a bulwark against executive overreach.
The Justice Department’s argument that the order’s implementation was not yet underway, and that legal action was premature, was dismissed by the appellate court. The court highlighted that the order imposed 'rapidly approaching deadlines' for states to coordinate with federal officials and overhaul their voting procedures ahead of the September and November elections, effectively forcing states to act immediately and threatening chaos for voters.
The executive order, a hallmark of Trump’s relentless campaign to undermine faith in the electoral process, directed the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and forced the Postal Service to deliver ballots only to those on the lists. It also weaponized the Justice Department to target officials who dared to issue ballots to individuals deemed ineligible, a chilling threat to public servants upholding the right to vote. Judge Talwani, appointed by former President Barack Obama, rightly ruled that the president lacked the authority to dictate such sweeping and undemocratic actions, and that the Postal Service had no statutory power to impose binding regulations on mail-in voting.
This decision follows a series of court rulings that have blocked similar attempts to restrict voting, including a previous executive order requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration. The Justice Department, undeterred in its crusade against voter participation, has indicated it may seek Supreme Court review if the appellate decision is not reversed.