U.S. Supreme Court rejects Trump's bid to restrict mail

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to let the U.S. Postal Service enforce a rule targeting mail-in ballots, dealing a setback to U.S. President Donald Trump's effort to restrict voting by mail ahead ‌of November's midterm elections that will determine control of Congress. The justices denied the Justice Department's request to lift a ruling by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston that blocked the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing the measure while legal challenges by states and voting-rights groups proceed. The agency adopted the measure after Trump issued a March executive order aimed at tightening rules governing mail voting. "The government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to ​the District Court's preliminary injunction," the court said in its brief, one-paragraph order. Justice Samuel Alito, ​joined by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented from Monday's decision, comparing some of the challengers' claims to a "Hail Mary pass" that is "unlikely to be successfully completed," using a football analogy. "The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate the mail," Alito added. No other justice dissented publicly. ​The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Railing against the ruling on social media early on Tuesday, Trump took note of the fact that the two justices who dissented were already on the bench when he began his first term as president. Referring to the justices he subsequently nominated — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — Trump wrote, "These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves." Trump's fellow Republicans are locked in a tight battle to retain control of Congress in the midterms. Restricting mail-in ballots would stand to benefit Republicans, given that Democratic voters disproportionately use mail-in ballots, according ​to various surveys. Under ⁠the new rule, states must provide ⁠lists of mail ballot recipients to the Postal Service and use agency-approved outgoing and ‌return ballot envelopes outfitted with unique barcodes. The Postal Service could then refuse to send out ballots that do not comply with the new standards or are associated with voters who do not appear on the lists. Critics have said the plan could disrupt the delivery of thousands of legitimate ballots as the November 3 midterm vote approaches and cause chaos, given imminent plans by many states to ⁠send out mail ballots to eligible voters. Talwani imposed ​an injunction on Sept. 4 blocking the rule, finding that it likely violated the U.S. Constitution, under which states administer elections. Talwani also said it would be impossible for the states to comply given the ⁠rapidly approaching midterms. Another federal judge, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols in Washington, D.C., also ruled against the new rule on Sunday. Sophia Lin Lakin, voting rights project director at the American Civil Liberties Union, which helped to represent some of the challengers to the USPS rule, welcomed Monday's decision. "This administration keeps testing the limits of its power, as if the rules ‌governing our elections are merely suggestions to ignore when they don't suit the president's agenda. But the Constitution gives states and Congress the power to set the rules for federal elections — not the president, and not the Postal Service," she said. [Read Full Story on CBC News →](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/mail-in-voting-us-supreme-court-rejection-trump-9.7343984)