Close Menu

    Subscribe to Updates

    Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

    What's Hot

    UN food agency funding cuts leave world ill-equipped for looming food crises

    September 24, 2026

    Turkey arrests founder of brokerage at centre of $18bn alleged Ponzi scheme

    September 23, 2026

    Meta’s Muse AI causes Schwab selloff

    September 23, 2026
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    Addison Markets Addison Markets
    • Home
    • USA
    • Europe
    • Business
    • Investing
    • Tech
    • Politics
    • Contact Us
    Addison Markets Addison Markets
    Home»Politics»Supreme Court lets Trump move toward mail-ballot restrictions
    Politics

    Supreme Court lets Trump move toward mail-ballot restrictions

    franperez66q@protonmail.comBy franperez66q@protonmail.comAugust 24, 2026No Comments2 Mins Read
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest Telegram LinkedIn Tumblr WhatsApp Email
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Telegram Email


    A voter drops their ballot at an official ballot drop box inside City Hall during a primary election in San Francisco, California, US, on Tuesday, June 2, 2026.

    David Paul Morris | Bloomberg | Getty Images

    The Supreme Court on Monday sided with President Donald Trump for now in his effort to impose sweeping new restrictions on distributing mail ballots, putting on hold a lower-court ruling that had blocked key parts of the plan ahead of November’s midterm elections.

    The justices, over three dissents, paused a ruling by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston that prevented the Trump administration from carrying out portions of a March executive order involving the U.S. Postal Service and voter eligibility lists. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.

    But the decision does not immediately allow the Postal Service to put its new mail-ballot system into effect.

    A separate nationwide injunction issued Aug. 11 by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston still blocks USPS from implementing the new procedures for the Nov. 3 elections. The administration would have to overcome that order as well.

    The distinction was central to the Supreme Court’s decision.

    The majority said Trump’s executive order itself does not require states to change how they conduct elections. Instead, it directs federal agencies to develop policies that could later impose requirements on states. Because those policies had not yet been implemented when 23 states and Washington, D.C., challenged the order, the court said the challenge was premature.

    Choose CNBC as your preferred source on Google and never miss a moment from the most trusted name in business news.



    Source link

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    franperez66q@protonmail.com
    • Website

    Related Posts

    Former Tory campaign chief pleads guilty over election bet

    September 10, 2026

    Trump pledges $5,000 ‘dividend’ to Americans if GOP wins midterms

    September 10, 2026

    Tax banks to give some households energy bill cut, unions tell PM

    September 10, 2026

    U.S.-Iran war: Trump warns Tehran over activity at Pickaxe Mountain

    September 10, 2026

    Tourist tax plans for England set to be outlined

    September 10, 2026

    Trump says oil and gas prices won’t fall until after midterm election

    September 10, 2026
    Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

    Top Reviews
    Editors Picks

    UN food agency funding cuts leave world ill-equipped for looming food crises

    September 24, 2026

    Turkey arrests founder of brokerage at centre of $18bn alleged Ponzi scheme

    September 23, 2026

    Meta’s Muse AI causes Schwab selloff

    September 23, 2026

    Greenback Is Bid

    September 23, 2026
    © 2026 All right reserved
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms & Conditions

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.