Judge Once Again Blocks Trump Administration’s Plans to Restrict Mail-In Ballots
New York Times · LC · trust 62/100
The ruling arrived before the Supreme Court could decide whether to intervene but appeared certain to set off yet another round of appeals.
Listen · 3:53 min Share full article Sorting mail-in ballots in Largo, Fla., last month. Credit... Zack Wittman for The New York Times By Zach Montague
Judge Indira Talwani had already temporarily blocked the U.S. Postal Service from moving forward, in a ruling that was set to expire Sept. 10. The new order extends that block indefinitely.
What the ruling did not do was move the issue much closer to a resolution, even with time rapidly running out for state election officials to start distributing mail-in ballots to voters. The Trump administration had already appealed her temporary block to the Supreme Court, and the justices are likely to have the final word on President Trump’s plans ahead of the election.
The ruling came just a day after Judge Talwani held a two-hour hearing in Boston, with lawyers representing large coalitions of Democratic-led states and voting rights groups squared off with lawyers representing the Postal Service and a smaller group of Republican-led states that support the rule.
Judge Talwani reviewed their concerns about the Postal Service rule, which would require states to report to the Postal Service which of their voters are qualified to use mail-in ballots, and to adopt a new ballot envelope designed to be scanned and linked to voters. The Postal Service could withhold mail delivery of ballots in states that don’t comply.
She said she believed the concerns among states and election officials that it was too late to adopt the changes without widespread mishaps and delays. The election is now only 60 days away.
We are having trouble retrieving the article content.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.
Thank you for your patience while we verify access.
Read the original at New York Times →
Open in TruthVane →