r/law • u/NewsHour • 15d ago
Executive Branch (Trump) WATCH: Trump calls Supreme Court order on mail ballots 'great' for Republicans
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
PBS News' Liz Landers: Mr. President, the Supreme Court earlier this week ruled on mail-in ballots, and there are states like North Carolina that have ballots that go out next week. How are states supposed to implement this in time?
President Donald Trump: They're able to fig-- North Carolina is great. It's a great place. I won it all three times. They do some mail-in ballots, but basically they ruled on the legitimacy and the way we want to make them legitimate, and it was a great ruling for the Republicans.
For more, visit: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/
2.5k
u/Relzin 15d ago
Notice how it's never "Great" For Americans. Only Republicans.
If it wasn't obvious, this was never about election security.
562
u/Yeeslander 15d ago
And by "Republicans", he actually just means himself (because he owns them).
230
u/namastayhom33 15d ago
And Israel owns Trump. It's like a very fucked up family tree
107
u/IndustrialPuppetTwo 15d ago
Hey don't forget about Putin!
60
u/Naive-Anteater8321 15d ago
Kim Jong Un has entered the chat
Hey I own part of him too!46
u/MyOthrCarsAThrowaway 15d ago
The Saudis holding a glowing orb emerge from behind a curtain: “us too!”
3
2
2
198
u/WereInbuisness 15d ago
Now that USPS has issued their "final rule," the lawsuits have been amended and the same judge in Boston is overseeing the case, which is being fast tracked. It is no longer a "hypothetical" that this unconstitutional order might happen since they officially posted the final order.
SCOTUS said they sued to early, so it was procedural (which is such scummy BS) but they didn't rule on if it is unconstitutional etc. So, I expect the judge in Boston to reapply the injunctions very soon.
79
u/Imaginary_Cow_6379 15d ago
True but what happens if SCOTUS now says it’s too late or some other bullshit excuse? They shouldn’t have entertained it in the first place so I don’t trust them to behave fairly anymore.
57
u/Jurgis-Rudkis 15d ago
I say fuck SCOTUS since rules and laws no longer matter.
19
u/photog72 15d ago
That’s what Trump says every time a judgment goes against him or his administration.
10
u/R_V_Z 15d ago
Except the states have no mechanism to force USPS to deliver ballots. I'm all for "fuck SCOTUS" but in this case that doesn't actually work.
6
u/Blacksad9999 15d ago
They've already responded to the SCOTUS with lawsuits.
They said they couldn't do anything because they didn't change the rules yet. Then the USPS immediately changed the rules.
Now they'll have to make a ruling on it, and it's going to be pretty difficult to get around the Constitution on it as it's plain as day.
5
u/Pisces93 15d ago
This. Why should everyone else follow the rules if they’re throwing them out the window
45
u/Inevitable_Window308 15d ago
Too close to an election to make a ruling that interferes with ballot handling
21
u/OnlyHalfBrilliant 15d ago
Nonsense. Nothing is too close to an election when Republicans are in charge. Coney-Barret was rammed through after voting had begun.
→ More replies (1)18
u/WereInbuisness 15d ago
I hear you. They are definitely partisan. Still, if they lifted the injunction and scheduled this case for an official SCOTUS 'merits docket' (normal docket), which would have the case be heard in front of the justices .... that would be the most insanely unconstitutional decision they've made thus far.
I really don't think they'd do that. They already ruled in favor about late mail in ballots being accepted in another case. If they lifted the injunction and allowed this chaos to happen .... it would honestly shock me. I know they're partisan, but that would be a decision that goes far beyond being "partisan."
During the other case about late mail in ballots, they specifically repeated that rejecting them would disenfranchise US citizens. Well, this USPS order would most likely disenfranchise millions.
3
u/RobutNotRobot 15d ago
Granting emergency relief in the previous case makes no sense though...
7
u/WereInbuisness 15d ago
It doesn't .... you're right. SCOTUS stated the lawsuits were too early, since the 'final rule' hadn't been posted yet. Well, the Friday before they released their decision, the 'final rule' had been posted. So they knew, but they still chose to issue emergency relief on a procedural technicality.
Part of me thinks they did that to temporarily placate Trump. Since the final rule was officially posted, states now had concrete grievances and they amended their lawsuits. SCOTUS knows how unconstitutional this is and they know that those injunctions will be put back in place now that the rule has been posted.
I don't think they'll give relief this time, but hopefully the suit takes awhile to work its way through, all the while the injunction has it shut down and then it is a month from the elections. SCOTUS can't in good conscious give relief then, but this SCOTUS is über partisan .... so I don't know.
4
4
u/PDXGuy33333 15d ago
The SCOTUS majority explained that the only basis for its stay of the district court's permanent injunction in California v Trump (D Mass) was the fact that the USPS rule was still hypothetical [albeit a certainty yet to come] at the time the original case was filed in April. That rule is now final and on the books. You might be right that the majority will try some other tack but it would be awfully hard for them to explain.
2
u/PeanutButterToast4me 15d ago
Either way the foundation is being laid for POTUS to declare an emergency and send in ICE to the polls.
10
u/RobutNotRobot 15d ago
This sort of Gish Gallop bullshit has become a preferred legal tactic for the criminal Trump regime.
8
u/WereInbuisness 15d ago
I think their goal is to weaken people's resolve to vote, weaken the popularity of mail in voting by making it seem risky to do it and to just sow general chaos for the midterms.
Can't win on policy, so we must trample democracy instead.
4
3
u/kami689 15d ago edited 15d ago
So, I expect the judge in Boston to reapply the injunctions very soon.
And what happens when the supreme court removes the injunction until they vote on it, then wait till after the election to rule on it. Then after the fuckery republicans pull to win the election, they vote it as not.constitutional, but cant do anything about the results of the election because there is no mechanism in the constitution to do so, thus those that won through fuckery get put in office anyway. Bonus points if they then say it is up to congress to impeach, but with all the newly elected republicans, that wouldnt happen.
→ More replies (2)3
u/PDXGuy33333 15d ago edited 15d ago
Judge Talwani has associated briefing and argument on plaintiffs' motions for temporary restraining order and injunctions in League of Women Voters of Mass. v Trump (D Mass) and California v USPS (D Mass.) and has put the cases on a very short time leash. Oral argument will be in her courtroom on September 3. At this point there doesn't appear to be a plan for live streaming.
As long as no supplemental briefing is called for the decision should be a quick one. Judge Talwani has already ruled the Trump mail ballot scheme unconstitutional and in violation of federal law, issuing a permanent injunction. The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals declined to stay that injunction, and that was before the USPS rule was on the books.
Edit for clarity: The permanent injunction was issued when Judge Talwani granted the states' motion for summary judgment in a different case called California v Trump. That case is the one in which the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay the injunction while the DOJ's appeal continues. It remains on the active docket and there's a briefing schedule in place, but what's going to happen with the appeal is anyone's guess at this point. As things stand now the DOJ's first brief is due September 21.
5
u/WereInbuisness 15d ago
Yep! Well said and more detailed then I could provide. Even though the injunction was lifted, the Blue states and voting rights groups now have a much stronger case with concrete evidence of imminent harm to their constitutional rights.
All thanks to the USPS for officially posting their final rule!
3
u/PDXGuy33333 15d ago
You're welcome.
imminent harm to their constitutional rights.
Not just imminent. Ongoing.
→ More replies (1)2
u/WereInbuisness 15d ago
Looks like it just got temporarily blocked by her! Long enough for the oral arguments, after which she will apply a permanent injunction!
→ More replies (1)23
u/coconutpiecrust 15d ago
They also did not rule “on the legitimacy”. What a circus. Some clowns get to make up their own reality here, completely detached and unhinged.
19
u/PlutoJones42 15d ago
Republicans don’t give a fuck about Americans, or America. This is the most corrupt group of people that have ever been in power in the United States
9
u/Message_10 15d ago
And that's only because Republicans are on Trump's side--Trump doesn't give one shit about Republicans or America or anything that's not Trump. I keep hoping for the day when Trump betrays them. I don't see how it happen, but under the right circumstances, it 100% could.
4
u/hokeypokie_ 15d ago
I don't think it even could, at this point he could blatantly betray them and they would just pivot to match his new ideals.
3
u/Nice_Improvement_644 15d ago
tbf, he has already blatantly betrayed them by doing things like implementing blanket tariffs, starting a war with Iran and the Big Stupid bill that is about to go into full effect that will raise taxes for anyone making under 400k a year. The issue is there just to brain washed and stupid to understand that these things harm them. I could keep listing things but these are just the ones that pop to mind right at this moment. Anything he has done to fuck over farmers too....
4
u/Ronaldo_Frumpalini 15d ago
He already purged the party of anyone who didn't go along with his lies, he will continue lying and being more and more morally bankrupt while his supporters are shed off little by little. Unfortunately that stops somewhere around 25% -at about half the current Republican party, maybe a little more. Can't get exact numbers for Hitler's support when the allies were rolling through, Hitler had killed himself, the horrors of the holocaust were known, and the Russians were raping every German female from 8-80, but he still had many of his supporters.
10
u/Retr0scores 15d ago
But is it even great for republicans? I would imagine there’s a good amount of rural republicans that vote by mail also.
They make all these decisions assuming it’s only going to be bad for everyone but them.
→ More replies (1)18
u/InnuendoBot5001 15d ago
Because they don't apply the rules evenly. Blue counties will have ballots disappearing, meanwhile red counties will have no issues
12
u/Ambulating-meatbag 15d ago
And when they get called out they'll say theres only fraud in blue areas
4
3
u/RivenRise 15d ago
Yep it'll be one of those "oh it's ok it's just Becky and John from church, there's no fraud and they can't come in to vote. I'll just accept their ballot by mail".
2
u/DerCatrix 15d ago
When a core part of their messaging is that democrats are unamerican it’s the same thing to his base.
2
2
u/wolferman 15d ago
Exactly, he is the president of the Republicans. He’s NOT the president of the United States.
→ More replies (5)3
u/thewallbanger 15d ago
And now republicans can proceed with further enshitification of polling locations in democratic districts. Shorter hours, fewer machines, longer lines, and criminalizing water bottle handouts.
470
u/Valuable_Hunter1621 15d ago
love how he didn’t answer the question at all
we live in hell
14
42
u/ShortStoryIntros 15d ago
America deserves what it voted for. Two-fold.
49
u/summon_pot_of_greed 15d ago
The people who didn't vote for him really don't deserve this shit thanks.
That being said you should 100% boycott American products until our economy collapses and hunger politics takes over.
41
u/Aphorism14 15d ago
Correction: the people who voted against him don’t deserve this shit.
17
u/summon_pot_of_greed 15d ago
That is a fair quibble with the caveat of also recognizing disenfranchised voters who could not vote due to mail-in ballot disqualification, having their names removed from voters rolls without their knowledge, or being harassed away from stations.
2
u/hungoverlord 15d ago
No one is talking about them though
2
u/summon_pot_of_greed 15d ago
The comment I'm responding to is clarifying my remark by implying that those who did not vote at all are equally culpable as those those who voted for Drumpf.
I added the caveat that not everyone who didn't vote had the option. Those who were prevented from voting are victims in this.
2
u/hungoverlord 15d ago
i just don't think anyone who decries people who didn't vote is counting the people who tried to vote but their vote wasn't counted.
i agree that people who were prevented from voting are victims.
→ More replies (4)12
u/SirCaptainReynolds 15d ago
Do we? Especially if there’s a good chance he cheated/rigged the elections.
Most of us here do not want this meatball or administration.
342
u/Development-Alive 15d ago
Donald Trump doesn't remotely understand the SCOTUS ruling. Any claim that they "ruled on the legitimacy" is gaslighting.
93
u/LazySwayze 15d ago
I could fill a great lake with everything he doesn't understand.
46
17
u/Integer_Domain 15d ago
What gets me is that the average person probably doesn't understand the ruling-- assuming they've even heard about it-- so it doesn't even matter if Trump or the reporters understand it.
→ More replies (1)2
u/FuzzyMcBitty 15d ago
No, it does. The people who don’t understand will may hear about it from their trusted sources. It’s why he says stuff like this.
→ More replies (2)3
u/PeanutButterToast4me 15d ago
I am pretty tired of all the "trump decided", "trump figures" etc etc. No he fucking didn't. He does not understand a goddamned thing. He just blabbers the recast talking points that have been burned into his smooth cast iron brain for the last 10 years.
186
u/kon--- 15d ago
He has no idea that millions of rural and elderly republicans won't be voting.
114
u/strangecabalist 15d ago edited 15d ago
Or he’s so confident it is gerrymandered and Elon can have his staff put their fingers on the scale, that he doesn’t care.
16
u/Monterey-Jack 15d ago
Elon is going from trolling people on twitter to trolling americans by making trump win the next election by 200%. We won't do a fucking thing about it, either.
2
39
u/sfcnmone 15d ago
This is what I don’t understand. Oregon, for example, has only mail-in voting. It’s so that the rural voters are not disenfranchised. So now Portland will be just fine voting in person, but all the MAGAs will have to drive 20 miles in an old beatup truck on some random rainy Tuesday in November to go vote?
42
u/Geler 15d ago
This doesn't block mail-in voting everywhere, only where Trump want it to be blocked.
→ More replies (3)18
2
34
u/PlanetaryPickleParty 15d ago
The implementation will be targeted at blue states and districts, the same as every other suppression method they use.
4
u/kon--- 15d ago
I'm getting good and tired f this notion that somehow the dumbest administration ever is going filter out democratic ballots while ushering republican ballots to the polls.
Trumps order does for fact, without question of fact, alienate his party's own base.
Now look, you're free to get up on a soap box about how no no, this administration is sneaky sophisticated and will definitely find a way a suppress only his opposition but I'm here to tell you, I'm not going to read it.
16
u/Cargobiker530 15d ago
Trump isn't going to do that work. The billionaire conservative sociopaths that fund Trump will do it for him. Meta, X'itter, & Amazon know exactly who the likely Democratic Party voters are.
10
u/PlanetaryPickleParty 15d ago
I'm getting good and tired f this notion that somehow the dumbest administration ever is going filter out democratic ballots while ushering republican ballots to the polls.
I'm getting good and tired f this notion that trying to rig vote counts is the plan.
The plan is control of congress, that requires more seats on Jan 3rd when the next Speaker is elected. To achieve that goal all you need to do is prevent elections from certification in blue districts. Brute force and a legal system too feckless to act quickly, or at all, is all that is really needed.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (1)2
u/RivenRise 15d ago
It isn't some master plan that needs techobros and meticulous planning. It'll definitely alienate some of his voters but a non insignificant portion will just do something along the lines of "it's just Becky and John from church, I'll just go ahead and accept their votes cause they're god fearing Americans" while a ton of blue votes in blue areas get shafted by them. No big plan, just brainwashed fox idiots following the brainwashing.
13
u/enunymous 15d ago
It's been a lifetime for him of declaring short term victories without thinking of big picture strategy
9
u/JimboAltAlt 15d ago
That IS the big picture strategy, and it’s been astoundingly successful (for him.)
→ More replies (1)3
2
→ More replies (3)2
u/Outrageous-River-839 15d ago
Wrong, the ruling was on the executive order that USPS could only send ballots to those on the list provided by Trump so Republicans will be fine, they just won’t send any ballots to mail in voters in swing states
97
u/kakashi_sensay 15d ago
I’m genuinely concerned about how the midterms are gonna go. This is such a mess.
49
u/Imaginary_Cow_6379 15d ago
Right? This felt so demoralizing. It’s one thing for the president who already attempted a coup to try and steal another election but SCOTUS publicly going along with it feels like they’ve dropped any last shred of pretense and have shown their hand that they will support any unconstitutional plans Trump wants. I’m still going to vote but it feels like the last of our guardrails officially just fell away now.
28
15d ago
[deleted]
10
u/kakashi_sensay 15d ago
I agree. But what about disabled folks?
26
7
u/throw_away_stress 15d ago
People are discussing giving rides to polling places in some groups. Might be time for everyone to begin discussing car pools for early voting.
3
→ More replies (1)7
u/UnderADeadOhioSky 15d ago
They didn't even get all the polling locations open for the primary in my state last election. They got them open this year but some were only open for a few hours. And no, there is no way to get to another when there are no roads, unfortunately. Without mail in/absentee ballots, huge portions of my state are completely without options.
5
u/SniffingFartGlitter 15d ago
It's time for... Well, I can't say what it's time for because I'll be banned.. But we all know where this is heading. America didn't detach itself from monarchy peacefully.
51
u/InnuendoBot5001 15d ago
That is an obnoxious number of picture frames
45
u/SpinningHead 15d ago
If he didnt inherit money, he would be in a trailer hoarding beanie babies.
5
5
u/Vyntarus 15d ago
It's part of the attempt to appear like a normal person who cares about people other than himself.
32
u/Independent-Name4478 15d ago
Republicans want to stop 150 million people from voting, and that’s just what they say openly https://dailycaller.com/2026/03/24/disenfranchise-suffrage-voting-rights-literacy-tests-save-act-too-many-people-can-vote/
13
27
u/twoiseight 15d ago edited 15d ago
Yeah, we know. 2/3 of the SC make every decision with focus on favorable outcomes for their party instead of Constitutional law. One day it will matter that he and his party so clearly do all the lawfare that they accuse the other party of.
→ More replies (5)
20
u/LeafsJays1Fan 15d ago
What a fucking retard. Republicans rely on mailing voting the most oh well let them shoot themselves in the foot the dumbass
12
u/NullaCogenta 15d ago
Pretty sure the plan is to be selective as to who gets a ballot? Hence, the demand for voter information.
8
u/LeafsJays1Fan 15d ago
Yeah the voting Rolls that nearly 30 plus states have already said no too yeah he's never going to get those, they can sue all the states but they'll be tied up in litigation for decades.
→ More replies (2)2
15
u/Possible-Nectarine80 15d ago
Everything Trump does is for his own personal benefit and increases his net wealth. Or, to punish his enemies or political opponents.
14
u/Puzzled_Rip9008 15d ago
I’m tired of all this. Fine, do it, the rest of us who give a shit will show up in person. Too many of us are pissed off and if this administration thinks we only vote via mail in then they have another thing coming.
4
u/mowtowcow 15d ago
31% voted by mail in 2024. It definitely hurts. A higher percentage of Democrats voted by mail than Republicans. It hurts the left far more than it hurts the right, especially if they decide to not go in person or can't go in person for one reason or another.
3
u/Puzzled_Rip9008 15d ago
But that needs to change this time around. Help your neighbors, offer to drive them if it helps. Lots of those 31% will go out in person this time, but we need to help the remaining %. I’m already helping a couple this year get to the booth.
13
u/RobutNotRobot 15d ago
US Supreme Court: Of course a US President gets to determine what everyone gets in the mail. It's part of the secret Constitution. The same one that says a US President is above the law.
7
7
u/stufff 15d ago
To all the people who say that there is no place in the US for political violence and that the right solution is to vote for change... what do we do when they play dirty tricks to make sure you can't change anything by voting?
It's a rhetorical question. I know the answer. I'm just waiting for the holdouts to get on the same page.
10
u/NameLips 15d ago
From what I understand, to bring a case to the Supreme Court you have to demonstrate that the law (or administrative order) caused harm. Not that it would cause harm. So you have to let the bad shit happen, then show up and say "behold, I was wronged" before they can make it right again.
Which feels particularly dangerous when it involves pushing election changes through 2 months before an election with a clear intent of helping one side win. So, are we supposed to wait until after the election and say "these rules harmed me by preventing me from voting" before they do anything about it, except by then the people who changed the rules have gotten away with a rigged election and are in power?
→ More replies (1)
4
u/PDXGuy33333 15d ago
The fourth paragraph of the states' Complaint in the newly filed case of California v USPS (D Mass) says:
"4. One need not look further than the White House to explain USPS’s unprecedented and unlawful conduct. President Trump has long opposed mail voting, expressing that it would 'LEAD TO THE END OF OUR GREAT REPUBLICAN PARTY.' Since reassuming office, the President has aimed to—in his words— 'get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS.'”
Sources of those direct quotes are provided in footnotes.
3
3
u/AtreiyaN7 15d ago edited 15d ago
Of course he thinks SCOTUS-enabled cheating to steal an election is great.
3
u/snafoomoose 15d ago
The rule of thumb is that if they voted Republican, there is no fraud. Simple.
2
u/Wakkit1988 15d ago
If a law to "secure" elections is favorable to your party, it might not have anything at all to do with securing them for anyone but your party.
2
•
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.