Breaking News Supreme Court rejects Trump’s plan to limit mail-in voting in midterms
The Supreme Court has rejected President Trump's plan to limit mail-in voting before the midterm elections, upholding a lower court order that temporarily blocks the US Postal Service from enforcing new postal ballot requirements.
Written by Roundtablefrom 2 outlets' reporting
01What happened
The US Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump's plan to restrict mail-in voting before the midterm elections. The court upheld a lower court order that temporarily blocked the US Postal Service from enforcing new postal ballot requirements. Trump signed an executive order in March directing the USPS to deliver ballots only to voters on lists of citizens. Twenty-three states and Washington DC challenged the order, arguing it violated states' constitutional rights to run elections. A federal judge imposed an injunction on September 4 blocking the order, and an appeals court refused to put the injunction on hold. Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the ruling but indicated he might later side with Trump. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. The White House did not immediately comment.
The facts every outlet at this table agrees on.
02Every voice
One entry per outlet, in the order they should be read. Each links back to the reporting it was drawn from — check any of it.
BBC News
Read the original· bbc.co.ukHow they framed it
The BBC frames the decision as a setback for the White House, detailing the legal reasoning and dissenting opinions while noting the ruling may not be final.
In their words
The US Supreme Court has rejected President Donald Trump's plan to restrict voting by mail before November's midterm elections, in a setback for the White House. The justices upheld a federal judge's order that temporarily blocked the US Postal Service from moving forwards with new requirements for postal ballots. But it is unlikely to be the final word on the matter. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a conservative, agreed with the ruling, but indicated he might later rule in Trump's favour as litigation in the case continues.
cnn.com
Read the original· cnn.comHow they framed it
CNN frames the decision through the reaction of election officials, emphasizing their relief and the practical impact on mail voting administration.
In their words
Election officials in both Democratic and Republican-led states breathed a sigh of relief when the Supreme Court blocked President Donald Trump's sweeping restrictions on mail-in balloting Monday, which they had warned would upend vote-by-mail and potentially disenfranchise millions of voters in the midterms. The decision means the voters can cast ballots by mail as the laws in their state previously allowed.
03Where they differ
The outlets differ in emphasis. BBC focuses on the legal reasoning, the dissenting justices, and the possibility that the ruling is not final, noting Kavanaugh's signal that he might later side with Trump. CNN focuses on the reaction of election officials, describing their relief and preparations, and the practical implications for voters casting mail ballots. Both outlets agree on the core facts: the Supreme Court blocked Trump's plan, upholding a lower court order, and the ruling may not be the final word.
Described, not adjudicated. Roundtable does not tell you which account is right.
04Still open
- What will happen next in the ongoing litigation over Trump's executive order?
- Will Justice Kavanaugh ultimately side with Trump as he indicated he might?
- How will election officials address voter confusion caused by the litigation?
- What further actions might the Trump administration take regarding mail-in voting?
