So here's a classic Washington story: President Donald Trump signs an executive order, says it's about fixing a problem, and the opposition immediately says "see you in court." This time the battleground is mail-in voting.
On Tuesday, Trump signed an order that the White House says is meant to tighten mail-in voting rules nationwide. The order directs federal agencies to help compile lists of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote in each state. It would also require absentee ballots to be sent only to voters on each state's approved mail-in ballot list and mandate secure ballot envelopes with unique tracking barcodes.
After signing the order in the Oval Office, Trump said, "It's about voter integrity, we want to have honest voting in our country because if you don't have honest voting, you can't have really a nation." He added that he didn't see how the order could be successfully challenged in court, while attacking what he called "rogue" and "very bad" judges. "I don't see how they can challenge it," he said.
Democrats, as you might expect, see it differently. California Governor Gavin Newsom wrote on social media, "We're challenging it. See you in court." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer posted a similar warning: "See you in court. You will lose."
Voting-rights advocates and election experts also weighed in, saying a federal attempt to force changes on state-run election systems would likely fail in court. NAACP President Derrick Johnson called the order "unconstitutional" and "unserious" and said it would not stand. David Becker, who heads the Center for Election Innovation & Research, said the order was "clearly unconstitutional" and mocked it as the legal equivalent of trying to ban gravity.
There's some political irony here too. The order fits into Trump's long-running campaign against voting by mail. Yet Trump himself voted by mail in a Florida special election last week, later saying he did so "because I'm president" and because he had "a lot of different things" to do.
So now we wait for the court battles. It's the American political process in action: executive action, immediate opposition, and lawyers getting ready to argue about what the Constitution allows. The only thing missing is someone explaining how this all makes sense.
