A controversial executive order by a former president sought to block millions of Americans from voting by mail in the upcoming midterms, raising alarms about potential disruptions to the electoral process. The plan, which would have allowed federal agencies to disqualify voters deemed ineligible, was widely criticized as unconstitutional since election rules fall under state authority. After a Supreme Court ruling temporarily halted the measure, the president’s defiant reaction suggests further challenges ahead for voters relying on mail-in ballots. Legal experts have condemned the move as an overreach that could undermine public trust in the fairness of the election.
The extraordinary danger is that a president who believes he is the law, and the law is him, remains intent on disrupting the electoral processThis was originally published in The Stakes 2026, a newsletter about the midterm elections. Sign up to get it in your inbox For the millions of Americans who vote by mail – almost a third of the country – the week began with significant uncertainty that they would be able to easily submit their ballot this fall, thanks to a March executive order from Donald Trump that aimed to restrict mail-in ballots. By Monday night, the supreme court restored a measure of order by rebuking the president and rejecting his plan – but Trump’s frothing response portends more danger for the rapidly approaching midterms.Trump’s March order forbade the US Postal Service from delivering mailed ballots to anyone the administration deemed ineligible. The Department of Homeland Security, working with the Social Security Administration, would have devised that list of supposedly ineligible, noncitizen voters. On its face, the move appeared plainly illegal. One expert told the Guardian’s Sam Levine, “This is a wholly unconstitutional EO,” because ultimately the federal government cannot set election rules; only states can. Continue reading...
