BREAKING: Supreme Court Blocks Trump Mail-In Ballot Scheme

The MeidasTouch Podcast

The MeidasTouch Podcast breaks down the Supreme Court's decision to block Donald Trump's emergency petition to enforce a controversial U.S.

Key takeaways

• The Supreme Court ruled that enforcing the Postal Service rule would be arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act due to insufficient time for states to implement it before the election.
• Justice Kavanaugh concurred with the majority but noted a 'fair prospect' the rule could be valid in future elections, signaling potential future challenges.

Main topics

• Supreme Court ruling on Trump's postal ballot scheme
• States' rights to control election procedures

Notable quotes

"The Supreme Court has blocked this scheme, at least on a six to three basis. But for purposes of this ruling, if you include Kavanaugh with the majority... a seven to two ruling blocking Trump's scheme."

Conclusion

The Supreme Court's decision represents a significant victory for state sovereignty and electoral integrity,

Transcript preview

Speaker 1 (0:00) This is the big one we've been waiting for, folks. Breaking news, the United States Supreme Court has officially blocked Donald Trump's election ballot scheme, whereby Donald Trump imposed a new rule on the U.S. Postal Service, which would have changed the way that states were able to handle the mail ballots. The states were going to have to comply with some Trump postal service rule that had a barcode that had to match Trump's voter list. And if the states didn't match Trump's voter list, he would disqualify the state voters. This was part of Donald Trump's plan to interfere with the midterm elections. As I reported earlier today, the Trump appointed district court judge in Washington, D.C., Judge Nichols made that order at 1230 a.m. this morning. blocking Donald Trump's rule with the Postal Service. And as I explained, I think that he was trying to send a signal to the United States Supreme Court that a Trump-appointed judge from Trump's first term, Judge Carl Nichols, agreed with an Obama-appointed judge in Massachusetts. Nichols is from D.C. He's a district court judge there. And the Obama-appointed judge from Massachusetts is Judge Talwani. She also blocked the Postal. service rule. And so the fact that you had an Obama judge and a Trump judge both agreeing, I said, I think they're sending a signal. Remember the video I did to the United States Supreme Court that they were blocking it together and so that the Supreme Court should do the same. By the way, the video I dropped about an hour ago also predicted this outcome. I just, I released the video ultimately before the ruling was made. So if you were watching that video and you were like, Okay, I get it. The Supreme Court is warning about that they're going to try to enforce states' rights over Donald Trump, trying to have his own rule with the Postal Service that infringes on the state, time, place, and manner rights under the United States Constitution. I released that video and then five minutes later, the Supreme Court made this ruling. Now, the Supreme Court's ruling was a seven to two decision. There were two dissents. You had Justice Thomas in the dissent along with Justice Alito. In the majority, you had Justice Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee. Although Justice Kavanaugh said. There may be a fair prospect that in the future, a rule that Trump wants to implement may be something that could happen, but we're too close to the 2026 midterm elections. So I'm going to side with the majority. But even if you put Kavanaugh in the group with Alito and Thomas. That would still make it a six to three decision, right, with Justice Coney Barrett and Justice Roberts joining the three liberal justices, right, Ketanji Brown, Jackson, Kagan, and Sotomayor. So you would have them along with Justice Roberts, along with Amy Coney Barrett. So you would still ultimately be able to have a. majority in the future if Trump tries to implement this rule in 2028. Let's take a look right now at this order so we can look at it for ourselves. In the Supreme Court of the United States, the application for stay presented to Justice Jackson and by her referred to the court is denied. The government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the district court's preliminary injunction. Remember. There was the district court preliminary injunction in Massachusetts, Judge Telwani. And then earlier this morning, a district court injunction blocking the Trump Postal Service rule in D.C. That was the Trump-appointed judge, Judge Carl Nichols. and the equitable factors applicable for obtaining emergency relief from this court do not favor a stay. Justice Kavanaugh said, in my view, based on the briefing the court has received at this interim stage, there is at least a fair prospect. that the final rule falls within the postal service statutory authority, but applying the rule in the 2026 election would be arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the election. For that reason, I concur in the denial of the application for stay, but only Justice Kavanaugh said that. So in terms of Other Trump appointee judges, justices who agreed with the majority, you had Justice Gorsuch, you had Justice Coney Barrett, George W. Bush appointed the chief justice, Justice John Roberts, and they sided also with Kagan, with Sotomayor, and Katonji Brown Jackson. So even if Kavanaugh gets peeled off before 2028 and sides with Alito and Thomas, who knows if Alito is going to be there or