States Fight Back Against Trump’s Mail Ballot Order

States Challenge Presidential Order on Mail Ballots

Colorado’s Secretary of State Jenna Griswold is leading a charge against a new executive order from President Trump that aims to change mail-in voting rules. The order, issued recently, directs the Department of Homeland Security to create a database of eligible U.S. citizen voters. This database would then be used by the U.S. Postal Service to send out absentee ballots. However, this move is already facing significant legal opposition from several states.

Constitutional Concerns Raised

The core of the legal challenge is the belief that the President has overstepped his authority. States argue that the Constitution clearly assigns the power to manage elections to the states, not the federal government or the President. “The Constitution is very clear that states oversee elections, not the president, not Donald Trump,” Griswold stated in a recent interview. “And this is just the latest attempt of Donald Trump to push unconstitutional, unlawful actions on the state to try to take control of the nation’s elections.”

Legal Battles and Past Retaliation

Griswold and other Secretaries of State are preparing to challenge the executive order in court, expressing confidence that it will be overturned. “Donald Trump has no authority to restrict mail ballots. He has no authority to tell the Postal Service which ballots to send, which ballots not to send,” Griswold emphasized. This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has taken actions perceived as interfering with state election processes. Griswold recalled an instance where the Trump administration threatened to withhold federal funds from Colorado specifically over election matters. This happened after a woman who allegedly compromised voting equipment was serving time in prison.

Potential for Chaos and Uncertainty

Beyond the legal arguments, there are concerns about the potential for the administration to act on the order before courts can intervene. This could involve the Postal Service potentially not sending ballots to individuals they deem ineligible based on the new database. “All of this is a real possibility, and we have seen the Trump administration withhold funding specifically to the state of Colorado over election matters,” Griswold noted. The fear is that the President is using these actions to create chaos and doubt around election results, particularly if his party faces losses.

Fighting Back and Holding the Line

Election officials across the country are committed to pushing back against what they see as attempts to destabilize the electoral process. “We have to fight back and make sure that your state’s election goes as planned,” Griswold urged. She pointed to a previous executive order on elections issued by Trump about a year ago, which was largely struck down by courts. Griswold also mentioned leading a letter demanding that federal agencies confirm Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) would not be present at polling places. When the Trump administration requested sensitive voter data, Griswold stated she refused the request. “So unfortunately, this is a game of whack-a-mole, but we are hitting the mark. We are holding the line,” she said.

A Desperate President’s Actions

Griswold characterized the President’s actions as those of a desperate leader trying to undermine elections. “He is so unpopular and is trying to destabilize the elections. Again, he will not succeed,” she asserted. The sentiment is that despite the President’s efforts, American voters will ultimately have their say through their votes in upcoming elections. The hope is that the courts will act swiftly to prevent any disruption to the established election procedures before they can cause harm.

The article highlights the ongoing tension between state and federal authority in managing elections. It underscores the legal challenges faced by executive actions perceived as overreach. The commitment of state election officials to uphold established voting processes is a central theme. The broader implication is the potential for political interference in democratic elections and the importance of judicial review in safeguarding these processes.

Source: 'Trump has no authority to restrict mail ballots': Colorado Secretary of State (YouTube)