|
 |
Believe them when they tell you who you are.
Today, on Real America’s Voice TV network, conspiracy theorist and host Wayne Allyn Root urged Donald Trump to take control of the midterm elections. Root, who either has no clue or doesn’t care how any of this works, told Trump he could just declare a national emergency and then, even though the Senate failed to pass the SAVE Act before it left for recess, he could “get photo ID, proof of citizenship and a limit to mail-in ballots. You don’t even need to have the Senate’s vote.”
Trump, of course, did not point to the Constitution and the fact that it assigns control of elections to the states. Instead, he said he would consider declaring a national emergency and using it to take control. “Let me just say stranger things have happened,” the president said. It would not be the first time Trump has declared an emergency that doesn’t exist and attempted to use it to vastly expand presidential power at the expense of the American people.
Anyone who brushes this off as bluster is missing the point. Trump used to refuse to commit to honoring the outcome of elections if he lost. He said it in advance of the 2016 election, but he won. Then the 2020 election and January 6 happened and we learned the unthinkable was possible with Trump. There is every reason to take him seriously when he threatens to declare an emergency to seize control of the outcome this year. In February, Trump called for Republicans to “nationalize” elections. With polls showing him seriously underwater, there is every reason to believe he will become more desperate with his back against the wall.
Further evidence of Trump’s intent is found in his executive orders trying to interfere with voting. As we’ve been discussing for months now, an issue with the orders that attempt to use the U.S. Postal Service to limit who can get a mail-in ballot and federalize voter rolls is “ripeness.” Some judges have found that the administration is not far enough along in executing its plans for the courts to intervene. We discussed that back in June.
Today, in a case brought by the League of Women Voters, Judge Indira Talwani in Boston entered a nationwide order blocking the Postal Service from carrying out Trump’s efforts to assert federal control over mail-in voting policies ahead of the election. Previously, as a result of her decision in another case, his plans had been paused in some states, but not others (only states whose AGs sued were covered), creating still more confusion and an uneven playing field for voters to navigate. Last week, we discussed the Solicitor General’s effort to get the Supreme Court to weigh in on the administration’s side and permit it to move forward. The Court has not yet ruled.
 |
“Where the EO is presently causing confusion and threatening both increasing chaos and an erosion of trust in our democracy,” Judge Talwani wrote today. “The court finds that enfranchisement heavily outweighs the executive’s attempt to unconstitutionally insert itself into the domain of election regulation.” Smack.
One point Judge Talwani makes that is worth emphasizing is that the government, so far, isn’t defending the constitutionality of Trump’s executive orders on voting. Its argument is that ripeness point, that it’s too soon for the court to hear the case at all, and that it must not step in until the Postal Service promulgates a final rule. Judge Talwani disagreed sharply, “the court finds it prudent to review the EO now, where less than 90 days pend before the midterms and the millions of citizens who rely on mail voting require clarity as to how or whether they will vote in November.” She has frozen the status quo in place; if her order stands, the vote will proceed without any of the modifications to the rules Trump is trying to put into place.
She goes to pains to emphasize how the system works. She emphasizes that in the Motor Voter Act “Congress requires States to allow citizens to register by mail or when applying for a driver’s license…and to attest to their citizenship through the use of a federal registration form…Under the NVRA, States retain control over compiling rolls of citizens…To avoid potentially erroneous disenfranchisement, the NVRA also prohibits States from systematically removing ineligible individuals from voter rolls fewer than 90 days before a federal election.” States effectuate the law in different ways as is their right—Congress can set national standards in federal elections, but it’s up to the states to administer their own election.
 |
Judge Talwani’s order preliminarily enjoins the administration from “implementing, giving effect to, or enforcing” Section 3 of Executive Order No. 14399 in regard to the midterm elections. That means the Postal Service may not refuse “to transmit mail-in or absentee ballots” and is also barred from issuing additional rules and regulations aimed at carrying out the Executive Order.
Today’s news is good. We would do well to remember that we are only here because of Trump’s insistence on trying to prevent the votes of Americans who don’t vote with him from counting. That’s something no president should do and no court, or citizen for that matter, should tolerate.
In her opinion, Judge Talwani notes that “A ‘consistent line of decisions’ by the Supreme Court in cases involving attempts to deny or restrict the right of suffrage has made ‘indelibly clear’ that ‘the Constitution of the United States protects the right of all qualified citizens to vote, in state as well as in federal elections.’…Indeed, ‘[t]he right to vote freely for the candidate of one’s choice is of the essence of a democratic society, and any restrictions on that right strike at the heart of representative government.’”
Trump has told us who he is. We absolutely must believe him and prepare to protect our right to vote.
Civil Discourse is here to make sure you know what’s happening before it’s too late to matter. We read the court decisions, follow the cases, and connect the dots so you have the facts and the context you need to understand what’s at stake. Paid subscriptions make that work possible—and make it possible for us to keep the newsletter available for free to everyone.
If that’s work you value, please become a paid subscriber tonight. And to those of you who already have, thank you. You make Civil Discourse possible.
We’re in this together,
Joyce