Did Liberal Justices Delay Dissents To Stop Trump’s Voting EO?– thefederalist.com

Did the Supreme Court’s liberal justices slow-walk their dissents in litigation over President Trump’s mail-in voting order to run out the clock on its implementation for the 2026 midterms? That seems to be what Justice Samuel Alito subtly suggested in the court’s most recent ruling on the subject.

On Monday night, the high court rejected the Trump administration’s request to pause a lower court blockade on a new U.S. Postal Service rule. As described by Fox News, the new rule required election officials to “submit ballot-envelope designs for approval and upload voter information and unique tracking barcodes to a new USPS portal.”

The decision — which effectively bars the policy from taking effect for the fall elections — was presumably 7-2, with Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas saying they would have granted the government’s request for relief. Aside from Justice Brett Kavanaugh — who said the USPS rule seems lawful but denied the government’s request because it’s too close to the midterms for election officials to implement it — the majority offered little explanation for its decision.

Alito, on the other hand, penned a lengthy dissent (joined by Thomas) outlining several issues with the court’s holding. It was in this opinion that the Bush 43 appointee seemingly telegraphed some potentially nefarious shenanigans by the court’s Democrat appointees in the case.

The apparent hint came in the dissent’s concluding pages, in which Alito refuted the alleged concerns that the Democrat-led states challenging the Postal Service rule had regarding “the practical effects of implementing the rule close to the midterm elections.” While taking “that problem very seriously,” the justice highlighted two key points demonstrating why it isn’t enough to warrant rejecting the government’s request to implement the rule for the 2026 contests.