Source: Fox News
Summary
California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced plans to sue the Trump administration over its mail-in voting restrictions after the Supreme Court allowed the executive order to proceed. The court ruled 6-3 in favor of the administration, lifting an injunction that had blocked the order in 23 states. Newsom criticized the decision, saying it would disenfranchise voters. His office highlighted two election-related bills in the California Legislature aimed at protecting elections. The U.S. Postal Service and Department of Justice said they would implement the revised mail-ballot restrictions. The Supreme Court ruled the provision did not impose obligations on states, so they lacked standing.
Our Reading
As expected, the matter has reached another stage.
Newsom vows to sue again.
Supreme Court lets the order move forward.
California pushes new laws to block the rules.
The court says states aren’t harmed, but the fight continues.
Author: Evan Null
California’s Legal Response
California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced plans to sue the Trump administration over its mail-in voting restrictions. The decision came after the Supreme Court allowed the executive order to proceed. Newsom criticized the ruling, calling it a move to disenfranchise voters. His office highlighted two bills in the California Legislature aimed at protecting elections. The U.S. Postal Service and Department of Justice said they would implement the revised mail-ballot restrictions. The court ruled the provision did not impose obligations on states, so they lacked standing.
Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in favor of the Trump administration, lifting an injunction that had blocked the order in 23 states. The court concluded that the challenged provision directing the Department of Homeland Security to create and distribute state citizenship lists imposed obligations on federal agencies rather than the states themselves. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. The court wrote that states “suffer no concrete harm from” the provision, so they lacked standing.
Newsom’s Statement
Newsom criticized the decision in a statement released by his office. He said the Supreme Court let the Trump administration move ahead with its plan to disenfranchise voters. California will be suing again to block the rules. Newsom’s office described the measures as an “Election Protection” package. The governor said the bills build on election-related legislation he signed earlier this summer. The U.S. Postal Service and Department of Justice said they would implement the revised mail-ballot restrictions.
Legislative Measures
AB 282 would establish new felonies involving the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified. SB 259 would establish criminal penalties for interfering with the delivery or return of mail-in ballots. The bills aim to protect California’s elections from interference. Newsom’s office highlighted the measures as part of an “Election Protection” package. The governor said they build on legislation he signed earlier this summer. The U.S. Postal Service and Department of Justice said they would implement the revised mail-ballot restrictions.
Continuing Legal Battles
The Supreme Court’s decision leaves the door open to additional challenges. Newsom’s office said California will be suing again to block the rules. The court ruled the provision did not impose obligations on states, so they lacked standing. The U.S. Postal Service and Department of Justice said they would implement the revised mail-ballot restrictions. The court concluded that the provision was an internal directive from the President to a subordinate. Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson dissented. Newsom criticized the decision, saying it would disenfranchise voters.
