By Staff, Alabama Political Reporter
U.S. Representative Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, spoke out last Tuesday against a U.S. Supreme Court decision that opened a path for mail-in voting restrictions sought by the Trump administration to take effect ahead of the November midterm elections.
The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Monday that 23 states and the District of Columbia lacked standing to challenge President Donald Trump’s executive order. The court did not rule on the legality of the order itself.
The order directs the Department of Homeland Security to create state-by-state lists of U.S. citizens and directs federal authorities to prioritize investigations and prosecutions involving election officials who provide federal ballots to people who are not eligible to vote. It also directs the U.S. Postal Service to implement new requirements for mail-in ballots, including limiting delivery to voters included on state-submitted lists.
States challenging the order argued that the Constitution gives states and Congress authority over federal elections and that the president’s directives could disrupt election administration. Litigation over the order remains ongoing, and lower-court rulings could still affect whether its provisions take effect before the November election
Sewell, in a Tuesday written statement, argued that the executive order is an attempt by the Trump administration to restrict legal avenues for voting.
“President Trump is terrified of losing at the ballot box in November. He knows his policies are raising costs and hurting families, so instead of changing course, he is trying to change the rules to make it harder for Americans to vote,” Sewell said.
“It is shameful that the Supreme Court would allow these restrictions to proceed—especially when we know that voting by mail is safe, secure, and used by millions of Americans, including President Trump himself,” Sewell said. “With just weeks left until the midterm elections, this decision will cause chaos and confusion for voters across the nation.”
Sewell vowed to continue opposing Trump administration efforts to restrict mail-in voting. “As a daughter of Selma and the top Democrat on the Elections Subcommittee, I will not stand for these attacks on the ballot,” Sewell said. “I will keep fighting to protect the right to vote and ensure every eligible American can make their voice heard.”
The Supreme Court’s decision does not immediately change voting procedures nationwide. The administration and states remain engaged in litigation over implementation of the executive order, including Postal Service rules governing mail ballots.
Another lawsuit was filed by state Attorney Generals and others, immediately after the Supreme Court’s decision, since the U. S. Postal Service has now released its notice of changes in handling mail-in ballots, including their review against lists provided by the Federal government.
The executive order has also drawn opposition from American Postal Workers Union President Jonathan Smith, who has described the administration’s approach as an effort to politicize the Postal Service.
In July, a group of Republican attorneys general led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall issued a letter supporting the administration’s proposed Postal Service rules, arguing they would “help states provide Americans with confidence in our system.”
