A federal judge on Thursday again temporarily blocked 
Donald Trump's executive order restricting mail voting. The administration has appealed the latest temporary block on the mail-in voting changes, The Hill reported.
What did the judge decide? In a ruling that PBS NewsHour reported came only about a week before the first mail ballots are due to be sent out for the midterm elections, U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani blocked the government from implementing the order for two weeks. In Talwani's words, the plaintiff states "have neither time nor funds to design new mail ballots, seek approval of the new designs, order production of mail ballots, update their own election management systems, train election officials to use the USPS portal and upload citizen data to the portal, all before the midterms." A hearing in the case is set for Sept. 3.
What does the rule require? The administration has issued a formal rule governing whether the U.S. Postal Service will deliver states' mail ballots, effectively restarting the legal fight, PBS NewsHour reported. The Postal Service says it won't deliver mail ballots unless states provide a list of voters who should receive them and format the envelopes in a certain way, and election officials contend there isn't enough time to revise their systems to comply. Democrats and voting rights groups contend the demand is unconstitutional, saying the Constitution grants states and, in some cases, Congress the power to make election rules, not the president or the Postal Service. New York Attorney General Letitia James, one of two dozen Democratic attorneys general who filed one of the suits, said in a statement that the rule is "a clear attempt by the federal government to interfere in elections it has no power to control."
How did the case get here? Trump issued the order in March, his second related to elections since returning to office, and the administration said early challenges were premature because it had not yet issued rules to implement it, PBS NewsHour reported. Talwani placed injunctions against implementing the order for the November midterms in two separate cases she heard in Boston, and the Supreme Court's conservative majority on Monday struck down one of those holds. The justices did not rule on the order's legality, instead saying Talwani had acted too soon. She then reluctantly removed the second injunction, and the plaintiffs refiled their cases, citing the Postal Service's publication of its final rule, in hopes of a more durable victory.
Figures referenced: Donald Trump. — JudgeMarket.
