A U.S. District Court judge in Massachusetts has ruled that nonpartisan voting rights organizations have legal standing and valid constitutional claims to proceed with a challenge against a presidential executive order that restricts mail-in voting. The ruling largely denied motions to dismiss filed by the federal government and intervenor defendants.

Constitutional Claims

The court reiterated earlier holdings that specific provisions of the executive order are unconstitutional because they improperly inject executive branch authority into elections, encroaching on powers reserved for Congress and individual states. The court noted that among its directives, the executive order unlawfully instructs the United States Postal Service to refrain from transmitting ballots belonging to eligible voters.

The judge found that the implementation of the executive order poses a “plausibly likely and imminent” risk of disenfranchisement for members of the plaintiff groups in the upcoming election. The court highlighted that affected members include individuals who rely on mail voting, such as overseas residents, out-of-state residents, people with disabilities, and those unable to travel to physical polling locations.

The lawsuit was brought by several organizations, including the League of Women Voters, the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, the Association of Americans Resident Overseas, U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc. Legal representation for the plaintiffs includes the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law, the Legal Defense Fund, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF.

Original reporting: Tampa Free Press — read the source article.