conv.

All stories
PoliticsQuiet 5d · day 6

Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block California mail ballots before midterms

The justices denied the administration's emergency request to halt counting of ballots from allegedly non-citizen voters in six hours, marking a sharp reversal in Trump's court winning streak.

newest coverage 5d agosummary written 5d ago6 pieces1 likes & upvotes NewswiresMastodonGoogle News

What to know

  • Trump's administration sought emergency Supreme Court intervention to block California's counting of mail-in ballots from alleged non-citizen voters on the eve of midterms; the court rejected it in six hours without explanation.
  • This marks a sharp reversal in the administration's Supreme Court wins on election matters, following September's rejection of voting-by-mail restrictions and prior Democratic losses on redistricting and voting rights.
  • Legal experts attribute the recent rejections to weak legal arguments rather than judicial reluctance to intervene near elections; the court's failure to even request California's response signaled how flawed the filing was.

“But when a case is exceptionally weak, as DOJ's was regarding the California ballots, it's inevitable that a message is sent. Not even bothering to get a response shows how weak the filing was.”

Edward Foley, Election law expert · Jerusalem Post ↗

Donald TrumpDonald Trump PresidentJustin Levitt Loyola Law School professor, election law expertEdward Foley Ohio State University election law expertU.S. Supreme Court Judicial body with 6-3 conservative majority

Supreme Court rejects Trump bid to block California mail ballots before midterms
Jerusalem Post

How it unfolded 2 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump articles

Peak 1 piece in two hours at Nov 2, 11 AM; 6 pieces over 6 days (5 articles · 1 post) Nov 2, 11 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Nov 2, 1 PM — quietNov 2, 3 PM — quietNov 2, 5 PM — 1 piece · 1 article — Google News 1Nov 2, 7 PM — quietNov 2, 9 PM — quietNov 2, 11 PM — quietNov 3, 1 AM — quietNov 3, 3 AM — quietNov 3, 5 AM — quietNov 3, 7 AM — quietNov 3, 9 AM — quietNov 3, 11 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Nov 3, 1 PM — quietNov 3, 3 PM — quietNov 3, 5 PM — quietNov 3, 7 PM — quietNov 3, 9 PM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Nov 3, 11 PM — quietNov 4, 1 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Nov 4, 3 AM — quietNov 4, 5 AM — quietNov 4, 7 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Nov 4, 9 AM — quietNov 4, 11 AM — quietNov 4, 1 PM — quietNov 4, 3 PM — quietNov 4, 5 PM — quietNov 4, 7 PM — quietNov 4, 9 PM — quietNov 4, 11 PM — quietNov 5, 1 AM — quietNov 5, 3 AM — quietNov 5, 5 AM — quietNov 5, 7 AM — quietNov 5, 9 AM — quietNov 5, 11 AM — quietNov 5, 1 PM — quietNov 5, 3 PM — quietNov 5, 5 PM — quietNov 5, 7 PM — quietNov 5, 9 PM — quietNov 5, 11 PM — quietNov 6, 1 AM — quietNov 6, 3 AM — quietNov 6, 5 AM — quietNov 6, 7 AM — quietNov 6, 9 AM — quietNov 6, 11 AM — quietNov 6, 1 PM — quietNov 6, 3 PM — quietNov 6, 5 PM — quietNov 6, 7 PM — quietNov 6, 9 PM — quietNov 6, 11 PM — quietYesterday, 1 AM — quietYesterday, 3 AM — quietYesterday, 5 AM — quietYesterday, 7 AM — quietYesterday, 9 AM — quietYesterday, 11 AM — quietYesterday, 1 PM — quietYesterday, 3 PM — quietYesterday, 5 PM — quietYesterday, 7 PM — quietYesterday, 9 PM — quietYesterday, 11 PM — quietToday, 1 AM — quietToday, 3 AM — quietToday, 5 AM — quietToday, 7 AM — quietToday, 9 AM — quietToday, 11 AM — quiet 12
Nov 3Nov 4Nov 5Nov 6yesterdaynow · 1:10 PM ET
  1. 2

    Legal experts attribute rejections to weak arguments, not election-timing reluctance

    Constitutional law experts said the recent setbacks for the administration and Republicans at the Supreme Court reflect the poor quality of their legal arguments. Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt called the DOJ's California case "hot garbage," while Ohio State's Edward Foley noted the court did not even request California's response, indicating the filing was exceptionally weak.

    “I think, frankly, the broader string of losses by Republicans, by the DOJ, is because their cases haven't been very good.”
    — Justin Levitt
    1. 3 outlets Trump's Supreme Court winning streak in election cases screeches to a halt - analysis

      first by Jerusalem Post, 5d ago · also Japan Times, Reuters

      1 more headline
    • thejapantimes@mastodon.social

      The winning ways for U.S. President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans came to a sudden halt in election-related decisions at the Supreme Court in recent weeks. https://www. japantimes.co.jp/news/2026/11/ 04/world/politics/trump-supreme-court-election/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=mastodon # worldnews # politics # donaldtrump # us #…

      thejapantimes@mastodon.socialMastodon4d ago1▲view on Mastodon ↗
  2. background

    Trump requests emergency block on California ballot counting — The Trump administration filed an emergency request asking the Supreme Court to temporarily block California from counting mail-in ballots from over 20,000 registered voters that federal officials alleged were likely non-U.S. citizens, timed to the eve of Tuesday's midterm elections.

  3. 1

    Supreme Court denies Trump's California ballot intervention in six hours

    The Court rejected the administration's request in a one-sentence order issued after six hours and 24 minutes, offering no explanation and noting no dissents. The unusually swift decision drew contrast to the institution's typical deliberative pace.

    “Six hours and 24 minutes. That is how long it took the US Supreme Court's justices to shut down President Donald Trump's attempt to intervene in California's ballot count.”
    — Jerusalem Post
  4. background

    Supreme Court refuses to enforce mail voting restrictions — The Supreme Court declined to let the Trump administration enforce a U.S. Postal Service rule restricting voting by mail, a voting method used more commonly by Democratic voters. Trump later expressed regret about nominating all three of his appointees to the court after this ruling.