California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Monday his state will file a new lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's executive order on mail-in voting, following a Supreme Court ruling that allows certain provisions to be enforced while litigation continues.
The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision lifted an injunction that had blocked the order in 23 states. The court stated that its ruling addressed the injunction and not the ultimate legality of the executive order, leaving room for further legal challenges.
Newsom criticized the Supreme Court's decision, stating that it "just let the Trump administration move ahead (for now) with its plan to disenfranchise voters across the country." He added that "California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented."
The governor's office also noted two bills moving through the California Legislature that Newsom believes will protect the state's elections from interference. Assembly Bill 282 would create new felony offenses for seizing ballots, election records, or voting technology before results are certified. Senate Bill 259 would establish criminal penalties, including up to four years in prison in certain cases, for interfering with the delivery or return of mail-in ballots.
These measures are part of an "Election Protection" package that builds upon earlier election-related legislation signed by Newsom. The U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Justice indicated they would proceed with implementing the revised mail-ballot restrictions subsequent to the ruling.
Trump's executive order directs federal agencies to compile citizenship-based lists of eligible voters and instructs the USPS to deliver mail-in ballots only to individuals on approved lists. The Supreme Court's majority opinion explained that the challenged provision, which directed the Department of Homeland Security to create and distribute state citizenship lists, was an internal directive to federal agencies and did not impose obligations on the states, thus lacking a direct harm to them. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the ruling.