Appeals court rules challenge to Trump mail ballot order premature
- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday upheld a lower court ruling that found a challenge to Trump’s mail voting order was blocked by a procedural hurdle.
- U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols concluded in May that Democrats and voting rights groups could not seek an injunction against the order because the Trump administration had not yet issued formal regulations under it.
- The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to consider a separate challenge to the same executive order.
- The unsigned circuit court opinion noted that forcing the changes before November’s midterm election “may well get halted by courts.”
Panel finds voting-rights groups cannot yet sue over Trump order
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Tuesday upheld a lower court ruling that a challenge to President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting mail voting was premature because the administration has not fully implemented it.
A day before the appeals court ruling, the Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on a separate case concerning the same executive order.
U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, a Trump appointee, concluded in May that Democrats and voting-rights groups lacked standing to seek an injunction because the Trump administration had not yet issued formal regulations under the order. The administration has since begun releasing those directives.
The three-judge circuit panel, which included two judges appointed by former President Barack Obama and one appointed by Trump, affirmed Nichols’ decision in an unsigned opinion that contained no noted dissents.
The panel wrote that if the administration “truly tried to force such changes in the few months remaining before November’s midterm election, it may well get halted by courts.”