American judge shaping election-law debates
A new lawsuit filed in Rhode Island targets FEMA and DHS policies, arguing that the administration is forcing states to modify elections systems and assist with immigration enforcement in exchange for federal funding. The suit claims DHS could revoke grants at any time and asserts that such conditions violate the Administrative Procedure Act and the Spending Clause.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has refused to lift an injunction blocking several provisions of Trump’s March executive order on voting procedures, keeping a lower-court ruling in effect as the case moves to appeal. The decision comes as states race to adjust ahead of upcoming elections.
President Donald Trump has signed two executive orders that narrow who can claim birthright citizenship, targeting birth tourism and expanding exclusions for certain foreign-affiliated parents. The measures follow a June Supreme Court ruling that struck down a broader Trump effort; legal experts and critics say the new orders will face immediate court challenges.
Missouri's redistricting maps, drawn to favor Republicans, have withstood a Cole County ruling endorsing a referendum challenge. The courts have ruled that the referendum process for congressional redistricting is not explicitly forbidden, moving the case toward the Missouri Supreme Court. The matter centers on whether voters can force a referendum on the map in the November election.
The Trump administration has mobilized a broad sanctions push to choke Iran’s economy, promising the toughest penalties in history. Officials say secondary sanctions will target countries and firms doing business with Tehran, with aims to isolate Iran and reopen the Strait of Hormuz as the war disrupts regional trade.
Courts have blocked a White House plan to require voter lists and standardized envelopes for mail ballots, delaying implementation as midterm ballots approach. The rules have been challenged as unconstitutional, with lawsuits arguing only states and Congress can set election procedures.
The Postal Service’s plan to implement Trump-era mail ballot procedures has been temporarily halted by a federal judge and is being appealed. Whistleblower allegations describe a rushed setup that could disenfranchise voters if implemented before the midterms, with the Supreme Court weighing next steps.
The US appeals court has upheld parts of a lower court ruling blocking parts of the USPS final rule on mail-in ballots ahead of the November elections, while allowing other provisions to take effect. The administration is seeking Supreme Court intervention as states prepare ballots and officials say the changes could affect turnout.
North Carolina becomes the first state to broadly distribute mail ballots as legal challenges loom over Trump’s executive-order changes to ballot handling and USPS rules. Courts are blocking the new rules for now, while officials prepare for a midterm that could determine control of Congress.
The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the government’s bid to enforce Trump’s mail-voting rules as states prepare for midterm elections. Courts have blocked the rules, while USPS and administration officials argue for a streamlined process. Ballots are already being mailed in several states, and lawsuits over the rules continue.
The government has asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the Postal Service rule changes around mail voting ahead of the November elections. Courts have extended an order, delaying changes as states begin mailing ballots. The administration argues the reforms are necessary, while opponents warn of confusion and constitutional issues.
The Supreme Court has denied the Trump administration's request to lift lower-court orders that blocked new U.S. Postal Service rules narrowing mail-in ballots, leaving states to use their existing procedures for the Nov. 3 midterms. Justices Alito and Thomas dissented; the court has not decided the rule's longer-term legal fate.