Despite the chaos, mail voting rules haven’t changed. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

[link removed]

A year ago we warned that Donald Trump had a concerted strategy to undermine the midterm elections.

Here’s news you can use: That effort is failing so far. For every move, there’s a countermove from voting rights groups, local and state governments, and more. In November, we should be able to have elections that are free, fair, and secure. But it will take a lot of work between now and then.

We saw that for sure this week. Yesterday the Supreme Court made headlines and sowed confusion, but it did not change much. Here’s what you should know.

Earlier this year, Trump signed an executive order to upend mail voting. That is the way one in three

[link removed]

Americans vote. Trump purported to order the U.S. Postal Service to refuse to deliver lawfully cast ballots unless the voter is on a list — which doesn’t exist yet — created by each state and sent to the post office for checking against mail ballots. It’s absurd. And, no surprise, it’s illegal

[link removed]

.

Earlier this summer, in a lawsuit brought by 23 states, a federal court blocked the executive order in part of the country. The judge also blocked the order nationwide in a lawsuit the Brennan Center and others brought on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts.

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court jumped into the states’ case. It issued an unsigned order

[link removed]

holding that the states did not yet have legal standing to sue. In particular, it concluded the states had not suffered an injury, because the Postal Service had not implemented the policy. In other words, the trial court had ruled too early.

This made big news, understandably, but those headlines confused matters a bit.

This was a procedural vote that let the Trump administration continue working on its plan to have the Postal Service decide who receives a ballot.

As the Court itself explained, “The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful.”

And in fact, late last Friday, under pressure from the administration, the Postal Service published a “Final Rule” to implement Trump’s scheme. The agency explained

[link removed]

that it had the power to set rules for mail ballot delivery because ballots are like “animal remains” or “replica explosives” and deserve special treatment.

Both the states’ case and the case brought by the Brennan Center and other voting rights groups remain ongoing. The Supreme Court’s Monday ruling is not the final word. Our attorneys are assessing next steps, and things will no doubt move quickly in this complex legal back-and-forth.

But a few things are as true today as they were before the Court’s order.

This executive order is still illegal and unconstitutional. The Constitution’s Elections Clause is clear, as courts have ruled over and over: States run elections. Congress has a legitimate role in passing national legislation and can override states. You know who has no role in elections, under the Constitution? The president.

And the Supreme Court? This is the “shadow docket” at work. Rather than letting the legal process unfold, the justices jumped into the litigation to help Trump. Justices like Samuel Alito bristle

[link removed]

at the ominous phrase “shadow docket” and complain it should be called an “emergency” docket instead. Here, the only “emergency” would be that Trump could not move forward with his push to restrict voting, just weeks before an election.

It’s hard to avoid noticing that, while the order is unsigned, it was backed by the Republican-appointed justices. Democratic-appointed Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote dissents. Trump has repeatedly said, as he wrote

[link removed]

in June about the SAVE Act, that without voting restrictions, “the Republican Party will never win another Election.” The Supreme Court, already at record lows

[link removed]

in public trust, will further bleed credibility if it is seen as a partisan electoral actor.

And as for voters — what should we know?

This legal fracas is happening so close to the election that, however it turns out, it is highly unlikely that changes will affect voting this year. Federal law

[link removed]

requires that the first mail ballots be sent to military voters starting September 4. We cannot let chaos engulf our elections.

All of which means that, in one sense, this is a lot of noise and manufactured chaos. Trump’s executive order is not in effect. Mail voting continues as before. There have been no changes to the Postal Service practices.

You know who knows that? Someone who voted by mail

[link removed]

this month from his house in Mar-a-Lago: Donald Trump.

His campaign to undermine the midterm elections is losing. The only way it wins is if people stay home.





The Disease of Big Money in Politics

Tens of thousands of people have been infected in the cyclospora outbreak across the United States, making it one of the largest foodborne outbreaks in the nation's history. Long-overdue safeguards that might have helped contain the spread more quickly were delayed by Congress following intense lobbying from the food industry. “The ongoing controversy illustrates the challenge posed by undue influence, which most Americans see as a form of corruption and which is undermining their confidence in our political system,” Daniel Weiner writes. Read more

[link removed]

A Guide to Early Voting

About 97 percent of eligible American voters will be able to cast their ballots before Election Day, either by mail or in person. A Brennan Center resource explains early voting options and encourages voters to learn which ones are available in their state. Read more

[link removed]

Road Map for Reform

Demand for reform has shaped the 2026 midterms. Elections during other periods of widespread American dissatisfaction with government “provide us with important lessons for how to translate campaign promises into substantive reform,” Maya Kornberg and Made By History write in The Philadelphia Inquirer. They highlight what current and future members of Congress can do to create change in a dysfunctional institution that is often resistant to it. Read more

[link removed]

The First Chatbot Election

About half of Americans report using AI chatbots — many of them to ask about politics — raising concerns that these error-prone tools could spread election misinformation. A recent Brennan Center study testing whether popular chatbots were more likely to counter or fuel election conspiracy theories found that the answer is a bit of both. AI may do more good than harm if there is “sensible regulation and a commitment from legislators and AI companies to ensure that chatbots benefit society,” Lawrence Norden writes in The Washington Post. Read more

[link removed]

Dragging the Supreme Court Out of the Shadows

As the Supreme Court increasingly issues key rulings through its largely opaque shadow docket — often without full briefing, oral arguments, or written explanations of its reasoning — it is sowing confusion throughout the federal judiciary and eroding confidence in its legitimacy. “Because the justices have shown time and again that they are unable or unwilling to police themselves, the solution is for Congress to step up and remind them who’s really in charge around here,” Jesse Wegman writes in this week’s Major Questions newsletter. He argues that a federal law requiring the justices to explain all their rulings could bring much-needed transparency to the high court. Read more

[link removed]





Podcast

Let’s Unstick Congress

[link removed]

Congress is failing at its most basic job: checking executive power. How did the legislative branch become so weak — and what will it take to fix it? Maya Kornberg and former member of Congress Tom Malinowski discuss potential answers on The Briefing with Michael Waldman. Watch or listen on YouTube

[link removed]

// Spotify

[link removed]

// Apple

[link removed]

// SUBSTACK

[link removed]





News

Rachel Levinson-Waldman on new revelations of sweeping Homeland Security surveillance activities // NPR

[link removed]

Margy O’Herron on the appointment of military lawyers as temporary immigration judges // WBUR

[link removed]

Eric Petry on ethics concerns around the Trump-backed IndyCar race // POLITICO

[link removed]

Feedback on this newsletter? Email us at [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]







[link removed]

Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

120 Broadway, Suite 1750, New York, NY 10271

646-292-8310

tel:646-292-8310

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Support the Brennan Center

[link removed]

View Online

[link removed]

Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here

[link removed]

to update your preferences.

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]