What Trump’s attacks on mail-in voting mean for the midterms

The extraordinary danger is that a president who believes he is the law, and the law is him, remains intent on disrupting the electoral process.

This was originally published in The Stakes 2026, a newsletter about the midterm elections. Sign up to get it in your inbox.

For the millions of Americans who vote by mail – almost a third of the country – the week began with significant uncertainty about their ability to easily submit their ballots this fall. This uncertainty stems from a March executive order from Donald Trump that aimed to restrict mail-in ballots. By Monday night, the Supreme Court restored a measure of order by rebuking the president and rejecting his plan, but Trump’s frothing response portends more danger for the rapidly approaching midterms.

Trump’s March order forbade the US Postal Service from delivering mailed ballots to anyone the administration deemed ineligible. The Department of Homeland Security, working with the Social Security Administration, would have devised a list of supposedly ineligible, noncitizen voters. On its face, the move appeared plainly illegal. One expert told the Guardian’s Sam Levine, “This is a wholly unconstitutional EO,” because ultimately the federal government cannot set election rules; only states can.

The plan was also fraught with logistical problems. A whistleblower informed Congress earlier this month that the Postal Service simply didn’t have the ability to implement the system safely, and that the whole plan was “perilously rushed and potentially unlawful,” according to Richard Blumenthal, the senator who handled the whistleblower complaint. State election officials expressed concerns that they would be unable to implement Trump’s restrictions this close to an election, even if they were deemed lawful. Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin had already begun mailing out ballots before the Supreme Court ruled, and chaos would have ensued had the court blessed Trump’s plan.