Supreme Court Faces Trump Demand on Mail-in Voting—What Justices Have Said

Executive Order 14399 directs federal agencies to compile voter eligibility lists and instructs the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to approved voters. The administration frames this as protecting against noncitizen voting, though such voting is rare and already illegal. A federal judge blocked key provisions in 23 states and D.C., and the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that decision. Solicitor General D. John Sauer called the injunction "indefensible," arguing the court prejudged implementation details still being developed. The Supreme Court's recent voting decisions reveal internal conflict: In Watson v. Republican National Committee, the Court voted 5-4 to allow ballots postmarked by Election Day to arrive up to five business days later. Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that "fraud concerns belong before legislatures, not courts." Justice Samuel Alito dissented, expressing concern that delayed ballot arrivals "risk further undermining the public's confidence in election integrity." Election law experts question presidential authority over mail voting. UCLA professor Richard Hasen stated the president lacks the power to reshape mail balloting through executive order alone.