Judge allows Trump to implement mail-in voting executive order

[1srelluc]

MSN

May 28 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Thursday declined to block President Donald Trump's executive order tightening rules on mail-in voting in a loss for the Democratic Party, whose lawyers argued that it could disenfranchise millions of voters.

The decision comes as Trump's Republicans are locked in a tight battle to keep control of both houses of the U.S. Congress in the November midterm elections. Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail.

The executive order signed by Trump on March 31 directed his administration to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and to use federal data to help state election officials verify who is eligible to vote.

It also required the U.S. Postal Service to only deliver ballots to voters on each state's approved mail-in ballot list, and required states to preserve election-related records for five years.

In rejecting a request by plaintiffs including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York that he issue a preliminary injunction blocking the measure, Washington-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols wrote that the Democrats had brought the case too early because the government had not yet produced any flawed citizenship lists and the Postal Service had not yet implemented any new rules.

"Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present," wrote Nichols, who was appointed by Trump during his first term.

The judge said the Democrats could ask for an injunction again after federal agencies took steps to implement the executive order.

Good, mass mail-in voting is a travesty to fair elections.....Any mail-in ballots should be absentee and "for cause".

 

[Manonthestreet]

MSN

May 28 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Thursday declined to block President Donald Trump's executive order tightening rules on mail-in voting in a loss for the Democratic Party, whose lawyers argued that it could disenfranchise millions of voters.

The decision comes as Trump's Republicans are locked in a tight battle to keep control of both houses of the U.S. Congress in the November midterm elections. Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail.

The executive order signed by Trump on March 31 directed his administration to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and to use federal data to help state election officials verify who is eligible to vote.

It also required the U.S. Postal Service to only deliver ballots to voters on each state's approved mail-in ballot list, and required states to preserve election-related records for five years.

In rejecting a request by plaintiffs including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York that he issue a preliminary injunction blocking the measure, Washington-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols wrote that the Democrats had brought the case too early because the government had not yet produced any flawed citizenship lists and the Postal Service had not yet implemented any new rules.

"Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present," wrote Nichols, who was appointed by Trump during his first term.

The judge said the Democrats could ask for an injunction again after federal agencies took steps to implement the executive order.

Good, mass mail-in voting is a travesty to fair elections.....Any mail-in ballots should be absentee and "for cause".

You mean I cant dump bags of ballots in the dark of night anymore

 

[SeaMajor7]

"Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail."

I am so freaking SICK of the MSM constant declaration that there was no election fraud in 2020.
It's godam GASLIGHT THEATRE BULLSHIT from these POS mf'ers at this point.

 

[1srelluc]

"Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail."

I am so freaking SICK of the MSM constant declaration that there was no election fraud in 2020.
It's godam GASLIGHT THEATRE BULLSHIT from these POS mf'ers at this point.

81 million votes my ass!

 

[JGalt]

MSN

May 28 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Thursday declined to block President Donald Trump's executive order tightening rules on mail-in voting in a loss for the Democratic Party, whose lawyers argued that it could disenfranchise millions of voters.

The decision comes as Trump's Republicans are locked in a tight battle to keep control of both houses of the U.S. Congress in the November midterm elections. Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail.

The executive order signed by Trump on March 31 directed his administration to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and to use federal data to help state election officials verify who is eligible to vote.

It also required the U.S. Postal Service to only deliver ballots to voters on each state's approved mail-in ballot list, and required states to preserve election-related records for five years.

In rejecting a request by plaintiffs including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York that he issue a preliminary injunction blocking the measure, Washington-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols wrote that the Democrats had brought the case too early because the government had not yet produced any flawed citizenship lists and the Postal Service had not yet implemented any new rules.

"Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present," wrote Nichols, who was appointed by Trump during his first term.

The judge said the Democrats could ask for an injunction again after federal agencies took steps to implement the executive order.

Good, mass mail-in voting is a travesty to fair elections.....Any mail-in ballots should be absentee and "for cause".

Farking MSN and Reuters.

"Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail."

 

[Moonglow]

MSN

May 28 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Thursday declined to block President Donald Trump's executive order tightening rules on mail-in voting in a loss for the Democratic Party, whose lawyers argued that it could disenfranchise millions of voters.

The decision comes as Trump's Republicans are locked in a tight battle to keep control of both houses of the U.S. Congress in the November midterm elections. Trump has for years pushed the false claim that his 2020 election defeat was the result of widespread voter fraud and has criticized voting by mail.

The executive order signed by Trump on March 31 directed his administration to compile a list of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state and to use federal data to help state election officials verify who is eligible to vote.

It also required the U.S. Postal Service to only deliver ballots to voters on each state's approved mail-in ballot list, and required states to preserve election-related records for five years.

In rejecting a request by plaintiffs including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York that he issue a preliminary injunction blocking the measure, Washington-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols wrote that the Democrats had brought the case too early because the government had not yet produced any flawed citizenship lists and the Postal Service had not yet implemented any new rules.

"Given that the Executive Order does not command Plaintiffs to do anything, and that no agency has yet acted pursuant to the Order in a way that could harm Plaintiffs, they have not suffered any harm at present," wrote Nichols, who was appointed by Trump during his first term.

The judge said the Democrats could ask for an injunction again after federal agencies took steps to implement the executive order.

Good, mass mail-in voting is a travesty to fair elections.....Any mail-in ballots should be absentee and "for cause".

The injunction will be refiled.

 

[Rambunctious]

Its getting harder to cheat libs... this is going to be a blowout election... republicans will win big time...

 

[Rambunctious]

Everyone knows Biden did not win in 2020.... we should all be sickened by the cheating with mail in ballots....

 

[JGalt]

The injunction will be refiled.

If you don't want voter verification, then you support election fraud.

No surprise here.

 

[my2¢]

So in other words, the ruling doesn't really change anything.

 

[Moonglow]

If you don't want voter verification, then you support election fraud.

No surprise here.

It has nothing to do with supporting fraud; it does have everything to do with states' rights in the Constitution.

 

[JGalt]

It has nothing to do with supporting fraud; it does have everything to do with states' rights in the Constitution.

State's rights don't have anything to do with federal elections. President Trump’s March 31, 2026, executive order (“Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections”) is explicitly aimed at federal elections (such as presidential and congressional races).

The executive order relies on the administration's authority over federal agencies—specifically the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

 

[BlindBoo]

That was Congress asking for an injunction because the Constitution gives the right to make voting laws to Congress. The Executive can't alter the laws with EO's. The are no national voter lists in this federation.

A coalition of Democratic states brought a similar lawsuit challenging the executive order in federal court in Boston. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, is due to hear arguments in that case on June 2.

"The American election system is designed to be run by states and localities, not the federal government, and a thicket of federal and state privacy laws makes creating such a list legally and technically complex. Further, Congress has never mandated the creation of a national voter list for federal elections, which would likely take years or even decades to implement."

Why Doesn’t the U.S. Have a National Voter List? • Bipartisan Policy Center

A flurry of recent activity has put voter registration in the national spotlight. Congress has been debating voter registration and eligibility legislation, and President Trump—who in February called to “nationalize the voting”—signed an executive order that would involve the federal government...

bipartisanpolicy.org

 

[jacksonlamb]

This will be overturned. There is no law that allows such an EO.

And, to you who are crying: there is no evidence at all of ANY election fraud.

 

[Hellokitty]

That was Congress asking for an injunction because the Constitution gives the right to make voting laws to Congress. The Executive can't alter the laws with EO's. The are no national voter lists in this federation.

A coalition of Democratic states brought a similar lawsuit challenging the executive order in federal court in Boston. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, is due to hear arguments in that case on June 2.

"The American election system is designed to be run by states and localities, not the federal government, and a thicket of federal and state privacy laws makes creating such a list legally and technically complex. Further, Congress has never mandated the creation of a national voter list for federal elections, which would likely take years or even decades to implement."

Why Doesn’t the U.S. Have a National Voter List? • Bipartisan Policy Center

A flurry of recent activity has put voter registration in the national spotlight. Congress has been debating voter registration and eligibility legislation, and President Trump—who in February called to “nationalize the voting”—signed an executive order that would involve the federal government...

bipartisanpolicy.org

GTFOH with the "creation of a national voter list for federal elections, which would likely take years or even decades to implement" when dems forced through mass mail-in voting in weeks...