Indira Talwani

The Trump administration renewed its request for the U.S. Supreme Court to quickly decide on an executive order that would limit vote-by-mail, a measure requiring states to list voters and restrict postal delivery. The urgency increased after U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued an injunction blocking the order nationwide just before Election Day. Because of the tight timeline, the judge ruled the executive branch has no authority to regulate elections.

The Trump administration has urgently requested a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court regarding an executive order aimed at limiting vote-by-mail. This request became more urgent after a federal judge blocked the executive order nationwide, noting that the executive branch lacks authority to regulate elections. The original executive order sought to restrict ballot delivery and require states to list voters who intended to vote by mail.

The Trump administration renewed its request to the U.S. Supreme Court for a quick decision regarding an executive order that limits vote-by-mail. This came after a Massachusetts federal judge expanded an injunction nationwide, ruling that "the executive branch has no authority to regulate elections." The original executive order would have required states to provide voters lists and restrict the U.S. Postal Service from delivering ballots to those not on the list.

A U.S. District Judge ruled that federal agencies cannot cancel already awarded grants to states like Vermont based on shifting executive branch priorities. The decision followed the abrupt termination of an EPA grant for infrastructure projects in northern Vermont, which had been halted when the agency claimed it no longer aligned with government goals.

The Trump administration requested the Supreme Court to permit an executive order requiring a federal citizenship list for mail-in ballots ahead of midterms. Democratic officials in 23 states and D.C. challenged the order, arguing states control election rules. A lower court blocked the order, which the administration now seeks to overturn urgently.

A federal appeals court upheld an injunction blocking President Donald Trump’s executive order to create a federal list of eligible voters and restrict mail ballot delivery. The ruling prevented implementation of the order in 23 states that sued, arguing it was unconstitutional and would disrupt election processes.

A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to enforce parts of an executive order tightening mail-in voting rules in 23 Democratic-led states. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a previous ruling blocking the order's provisions ahead of the November federal elections, leaving a lower court injunction in place.

A federal appeals court rejected the Trump administration's attempt to implement an executive order tightening mail-in voting rules in 23 states. The court declined to lift an injunction secured by several states, which a lower court judge had deemed unconstitutional.

A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration misused a federal provision to revoke billions in approved grant funding due to shifting priorities, violating established guidelines. The decision supports 23 states and the District of Columbia, which argued the revocations were unlawful and threatened critical programs.

A federal judge blocked the Trump administration from using a Biden-era grant termination clause to cut billions in funding for programs like crime prevention and scientific research. Twenty-three states sued, arguing the administration misinterpreted the clause to cancel grants, but the judge ruled the administration's approach violated the Spending Clause and lacked textual support.

A federal judge in Boston ruled the Trump administration cannot use an obscure clause to make billions in funding cuts to programs like crime prevention and scientific research. Twenty-three states sued the administration, arguing the clause was used to cancel grants, while the government sought to dismiss the case, claiming the lawsuit was speculative.

A federal judge in Boston ruled the Trump administration cannot use an obscure clause to justify billions in funding cuts to grants covering crime prevention, food security, and research. Twenty-three states sued, arguing the clause was used to unlawfully terminate grants, and Judge Indira Talwani agreed, stating the administration's interpretation violated legal requirements for unambiguous spending conditions.

A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration cannot cancel grants based on new rules established after the fact, blocking efforts to terminate billions in federal grant awards. The decision denies the administration's request to dismiss a lawsuit from 20 states, three governors, and the District of Columbia challenging grant cancellations since President Donald Trump's inauguration.

A federal judge halted President Donald Trump's executive order to create a federal voter list and limit mail ballot access, siding with states challenging the order. Vice President JD Vance compared the Watergate scandal to Trump's situation, suggesting it would be a short news story today.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Trump's executive order restricting voting by mail, citing constitutional overreach. The order required states to submit voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security to compile citizenship data, which the judge ruled exceeded the President's authority.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The order required states to submit voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and mandated the compilation of citizenship data by the Department of Homeland Security, both of which were halted by the court.

A Massachusetts federal judge blocked key aspects of President Donald Trump’s executive order to restrict mail-in voting, ruling it unconstitutional as states alone determine voter eligibility. The decision applies to midterms but not future elections, affecting states like Massachusetts and Delaware that spent money on non-compliant mail ballot systems.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The order required states to submit voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security to compile citizenship data, but the judge found these actions violated state control over elections.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The decision halts requirements for states to submit mail voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and stops the Department of Homeland Security from compiling voting-age citizen lists.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The decision halts requirements for states to submit mail voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and stops the Department of Homeland Security from compiling voting-age citizen lists.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The order required states to submit voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security to compile citizenship data, but the judge found these actions overstepped presidential powers reserved for states.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The decision halts requirements for states to submit voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and stops the Department of Homeland Security from compiling voting-age citizen lists.

A federal judge blocked major portions of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail, ruling he exceeded constitutional authority. The decision halts requirements for states to submit voter lists to the U.S. Postal Service and stops the Department of Homeland Security from compiling citizenship data for states.

A federal judge blocked President Donald Trump's executive order aimed at creating a federal voter list and restricting mail-in ballots, ruling it unconstitutional for violating separation of powers. The decision affects the 2026 midterm elections and follows another recent ruling against a Trump executive order related to voter registration requirements.

A federal judge halted President Donald Trump’s executive order aiming to create a federal voter list and restrict mail ballot distribution. The judge ruled the order unconstitutional, violating the separation of powers, and the decision applies to the 2026 midterm election cycle.

A federal judge halted President Trump’s executive order aimed at creating a federal voter list and restricting mail ballot access. The judge ruled the order violated the separation of powers, siding with states that challenged its constitutionality. The decision applies to the 2026 midterm elections.

A federal judge halted President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at creating a federal voter list and restricting mail ballots, ruling it unconstitutional for violating separation of powers. The order, which would have directed the U.S. Postal Service to deliver mail ballots only to those on the list, was challenged by a coalition of states and blocked for the 2026 midterm elections. The judge denied the administration’s motion to dismiss the lawsuits, citing the urgency of the election cycle.

A federal judge allowed Democratic-led states to challenge President Trump’s executive order on mail-in voting, which requires voter verification and restricts mail ballot distribution. The judge ruled the states could face significant hardship if prevented from challenging the policy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections but dismissed claims about future elections as premature.

A federal judge heard arguments from voting rights groups and states challenging President Trump’s executive order establishing a federal voter list and limiting mail voting. The plaintiffs claimed the order is unconstitutional and burdens state election officials, while the Trump administration argued the lawsuits are premature and lack legal standing.