“A Victory For Our Democracy”: Experts and Elections Administrators Celebrate SCOTUS Ruling Blocking Trump’s “Outright Election Sabotage”

On Monday, the Supreme Court blocked Donald Trump’s plan to impose sweeping new mail ballot restrictions on the 2026 midterms, the latest turn in a monthslong legal fight over Trump’s attempt to rewrite the rules of mail voting. In the wake of the Supreme Court decision, experts and elections officials alike are breathing a sigh of relief that Trump’s attacks on voters won’t have to be implemented as ballots start to go out for the midterm elections in November. Read more about what elections experts and administrators are saying:

Expert Voices

Norm Eisen, founder of Democracy Defenders Action: “The Supreme Court’s 7-2 decision yesterday was an unmistakable message that whatever policy disagreements we may have on other issues, they will not countenance Donald Trump’s outright election sabotage. That is good news for every American, and for voters who may be wondering: your vote is safe, free, and fair.”

Steve Vladeck, law professor at Georgetown University: “[A] majority of the Court was unwilling to abide President Trump’s transparent effort to make it harder for a large number of lawfully registered voters to actually cast their ballots in the 2026 general election. But it continues to be deeply sobering that it came to all of this in the first place.”

Justin Levitt, law professor at Loyola Marymount University: “There aren’t five votes for abject chaos…The court is effectively done with actors making sizable last-minute changes. The rules are now what they are, and the election is going to be — as it should be — up to the voters.”

Tianna Mays, legal director at Democracy Defenders Fund: “In this decision, the Supreme Court has made clear that the 2026 midterm elections must not be disrupted by the Trump administration’s efforts to implement an unlawful new mail-voting system mid-election”

Trevor Potter, president of Campaign Legal Center: “Today's Supreme Court decision prevents the US Postal Service from sowing chaos in our elections.”

David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation & Research said implementing Trump's executive order “would have done nothing for election integrity but would have imposed a vast and expensive new bureaucracy on the states…Thanks to the rule of law, voters will not need to worry about this.”

Jessica Mendoza, executive director of Arizona Students’ Association: “Today is not only a victory for mail-in voting, but a victory for our democracy at the Supreme Court. The Constitution is clear: states hold the power to oversee elections, not the president or the Postal Service. By protecting the right to vote, we protect the voices of our communities and ensure they are heard on Election Day, Nov. 3.”

Ilya Somin, law professor at George Mason University: “Earlier tonight, the Supreme Court, in a 7-2 ruling, refused to stay a lower-court decision blocking the Postal Service's policy implementing Donald Trump's executive order intended to curb mail-in voting…Trump's order is a blatant assault on federalism and separation of powers.”

Election Administrators

Marybeth Kuznik, director of elections, Fayette County, Pennsylvania: “The feeling of relief here is palpable…[but] with all the hullabaloo in the media, voters have become alarmed and many are afraid their mail-in votes may not be counted no matter what the ruling may be.”

Anne Dover, election director of Cherokee County, Georgia said the rule changes would have resulted in “thousands of people disenfranchised.”

Satya Rhodes-Conway, mayor of Madison, Wisconsin: “This is an important win for local clerks, who simply want to serve their communities and administer fair, secure and accurate elections. No matter who is in the White House, any effort to disenfranchise eligible voters is an attack on democracy.”

Dyana Limon-Mercado, clerk, Travis County, Texas: “We are grateful the court recognizes that this issue is not a matter of presidential preference — it is a constitutional right. Implementing this rule so close to the election would create confusion for voters and jeopardize the ability of election officials across the country to administer a fair and transparent midterm election.”

Ricky Hatch, Republican clerk, Weber County, Utah: “[W]e’re grateful that at least one uncertainty has been eliminated.”

Benjamin Hovland, former commissioner, Election Assistance Commission: “These results are good for voters. They’re good for election officials who are trying to run our elections and ultimately good for our democracy.”

Deidre Henderson, lieutenant governor of Utah: “Utahns can have confidence that the 2026 election will proceed as normal.”

Tobias Read, Oregon secretary of state: “This provides voters and elections officials with the certainty they need ahead of a major, federal election, and it sends a clear message to this country: Presidents don't run elections, the people do.”

Cisco Aguilar, Nevada secretary of state: “Today, Donald Trump lost another battle in his unconstitutional war to choose his own voters.”

Shirley Weber, California secretary of state: “Now, we can finally move forward and get back to what we do best: conducting our elections without a dark cloud hanging over us — fairly, openly, for the people, by the people.”