RESOLVING THE LEDGER
This is one outlet's own report from CBS News — Top — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 27 sources
Washington \u2014 President Trump\u0027s administration asked the Supreme Court on Monday to intervene in a 23-state challenge to his executive order that seeks to impose new restrictions for mail ballots and directs the Homeland Security Department to create lists of eligible voters.The request for emergency relief to the Supreme Court comes after a federal appeals court on Sunday left in place a lower court decision that blocked implementation of key provisions of the president\u0027s executive order in nearly half the states ahead of the November midterm elections.Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued that the district court\u0027s injunction is "extraordinary" because it prevents federal agencies from taking steps to implement Mr. Trump\u0027s directive, which he said "merely sets forth general policy guidance" and aims to promote election integrity."The Executive Order functions only to direct the President\u0027s subordinates to take appropriate and lawful action to implement the President\u0027s policy objectives," he wrote. "By stopping the relevant agencies and officials from implementing that Order with respect to the November 2026 federal election, the injunction operates as \u0027an improper intrusion by a federal court into the workings of a coordinate branch of the Government.\u0027"Mr. Trump signed the executive order at issue in the case in March. The measure directs the Homeland Security secretary to compile and send to each state a "state citizenship list" of U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote. It also instructs the U.S. Postal Service to come up with new rules for mail ballots, including requiring them to be marked in a specific envelope and allowing mail ballots to be sent to voters on their state\u0027s list.Days after the president rolled out his directive, a group of 23 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit arguing that the executive order is unlawful.U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, who sits on the federal court in Massachusetts, sided with the states in June and barred the Trump administration from implementing provisions related to mail ballots and the state citizenship lists for the Nov. 3 federal elections in the 23 states that sued.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit then declined to let the Trump administration move forward with the executive order.Sauer argued that Talwani\u0027s injunction was "premature," since federal agencies are only working to put together plans to put the president\u0027s executive order in place.\u00a0He said the states\u0027 challenge is to "hypothetical" agency action, and the president is allowed under the law to direct his subordinates to consider "appropriate" action.\u00a0"The harms to voter integrity in that election if the government\u0027s policy is not in place cannot be undone even if the government later prevails on the merits of its appeal," Sauer wrote.
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.