California plans to sue again to stop Trump from restricting mail voting and could make blocking delivery a felony
California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, said on Monday that his state would sue the Trump administration again to block federal changes to mail voting, after the US supreme court ruled that a previous suit was filed too early in the process by his state and 22 others.
“California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented,” Newsom posted.
Newsom also highlighted two new proposed state laws that would make it a crime to interfere with the delivery of mail ballots.
In a press release, Newsom added that he and the California legislature “are doubling down to ensure California continues to defend democracy as new threats from Donald Trump and his election-rigging allies emerge”.
Two draft laws would establish three new felonies under California state law, punishable by up to four years in prison.
One of the laws would prohibit anyone “from seizing or causing the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified”, and blocks “any person with authority from directing someone in their supervision to do the same”.
The second law makes it a felony “for a person in a position with authority” to direct another person “to interfere with a ballot’s delivery to a voter or return to the local elections official”. That same legislation would make it a misdemeanor to interfere with “the delivery of a vote by mail ballot to a voter”.
Key events
Closing summary
This concludes our live coverage of the second Trump administration for the day. Here are the latest developments:
-
The US supreme court lifted one of two injunctions that block the Trump administration from pressing ahead with a sweeping effort to restrict mail voting
-
The court’s decision “needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections”, justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a blistering dissent.
-
The NAACP, which sued in April to block the order to restrict mail-in voting, said that Republicans are trying to make it harder to vote in November because they “know full well that they are unpopular and will lose in a free and fair election”.
-
The Trump administration is preparing to revoke the visas of up to 200,000 foreigners who have applied for asylum status in the United States, according to US state department documents obtained by the Associated Press.
-
Donald Trump responded to criticism of his new tariffs on Canadian imports from the premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, by comparing him unfavorably to his late brother, Rob Ford, a former mayor of Toronto best known for smoking crack.
-
US treasury secretary Scott Bessent announced that the US has begun an “unprecedented” sanctions campaign against Iran “and its enablers”.
Legal experts say US supreme court decision does not mean Trump can restrict mail voting for midterms
While the US supreme court on Monday lifted one of two injunctions that block the Trump administration from pressing ahead with a sweeping federal power grab over mail voting, a number of legal experts have pointed out that no changes can be made while the second injunction remains in place. The real action, they note, will come in legal challenges to a US Postal Service rule that would allow it to not deliver ballots in states that refuse to hand over lists of eligible voters, in line with an executive order issued in March by Donald Trump.
“Please don’t overreact to Roberts Court decision on the contemplated USPS ballot moves,” Norm Eisen, a former ethics adviser in the Obama White House and a founder of the legacy advocacy group Democracy Defenders Action, wrote on social media. “They simply held that the injunction came too early in the process, before there was a final rule … Now we HAVE a final rule & we will litigate it. I’m as confident in our arguments here as in any of our cases!”
Steve Vladeck, a Georgetown University law professor, wrote in his newsletter: “Late Friday night, the U.S. Postal Service (finally) released the ‘Final Rule’ that was supposed to be published by the end of July that purports to implement Trump’s executive order. It’s that rule, not the executive order itself, that would be the basis for the USPS messing with mail-in ballots come October and November.”
Vladeck suggests that, as soon as Tuesday, a federal judge could block the new USPS rule on mail ballots, which essentially requires states to hand over lists of eligible voters to the federal government before any mail ballots can be delivered. That rule is scheduled to go into effect on Wednesday.
Something called the Purcell principle, which dictates that courts should not change the rules on how people vote too close to an election, could come in to play, Vladeck writes.
With mail ballots set to go out to North Carolina voters in the military or abroad at the end of next week, the supreme court’s conservative majority could invoke the Purcell principle as an excuse to strike down any legal challenge to the new USPS rule as coming “too close to the election”.
“That’s a genuine concern, and given the Court’s own repeated transgressions of the Purcell principle earlier this term in Texas, Louisiana, and Alabama, to hide behind it to allow the USPS Final Rule to go into effect would be as indefensible and anti-democratic a ruling as the Court has handed down in a very long time,” Vladeck argues.
Oregon promises to fight Trump’s effort to change its mail voting system
The two dozen plaintiffs that lost at the supreme court on Monday, 23 states and the District of Columbia that sued to block the Trump administration from implementing sweeping restrictions on mail voting, have lined up to express outrage and their determination to fight on in the courts.
Officials in Oregon, which has conducted its elections entirely by mail since 1998, vowed on Monday to take legal action if the US Postal Service or any other federal agency “unlawfully takes steps to interfere with mail voting”.
“We’re not going to let Donald Trump interfere in our elections—and we’re certainly not going to let him decide who gets a ballot and who doesn’t,” Oregon’s attorney general Dan Rayfield said. “Today’s court decision is a temporary setback, nothing more. This fight is far from over.”
The state’s top elections official, secretary of state Tobias Read, said the midterms “will proceed as planned this November, free from any illegal federal interference”.
“President Trump’s directive to the United States Postal Service is unconstitutional and an assault on our democracy and designed to silence voters,” Oregon’s governor, Tina Kotek, said. “Oregon has been conducting elections by mail-in voting safely and securely for decades. My message to the President is clear: keep your hands off our elections.”
California plans to sue again to stop Trump from restricting mail voting and could make blocking delivery a felony
California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, said on Monday that his state would sue the Trump administration again to block federal changes to mail voting, after the US supreme court ruled that a previous suit was filed too early in the process by his state and 22 others.
“California will be suing AGAIN to block these Orwellian rules from being implemented,” Newsom posted.
Newsom also highlighted two new proposed state laws that would make it a crime to interfere with the delivery of mail ballots.
In a press release, Newsom added that he and the California legislature “are doubling down to ensure California continues to defend democracy as new threats from Donald Trump and his election-rigging allies emerge”.
Two draft laws would establish three new felonies under California state law, punishable by up to four years in prison.
One of the laws would prohibit anyone “from seizing or causing the seizure of ballots, election records, or certified voting technology before election results are certified”, and blocks “any person with authority from directing someone in their supervision to do the same”.
The second law makes it a felony “for a person in a position with authority” to direct another person “to interfere with a ballot’s delivery to a voter or return to the local elections official”. That same legislation would make it a misdemeanor to interfere with “the delivery of a vote by mail ballot to a voter”.
Despite supreme court ruling, nationwide injunction still blocks Trump administration from implementing restrictions on mail voting
Rick Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, points out on his Election Law Blog that the supreme court on Monday only lifted one of two lower-court orders that blocked the Trump administration from implementing its planned restrictions on mail voting.
The other injunction, not ruled on by the court yet, still stops the US Postal Service from implementing a new rule that would allow it to refuse to deliver ballots mailed by voters who are not on a list approved by the federal government.
Hasen also observes that it is “just weird” that the court issued its opinion on Monday, in which it ruled that the states that sued to block the implementation of new federal rules around mail voting should have waited until the USPS proposed a new rule to do what Trump directed. While it is true that the 23 states and Washington DC filed suit before the USPS issued its new rule, the final rule was posted online late Friday, and is set to take effect this week if the court lifts the both injunctions.
Monday’s supreme court decision, Hasen added, “just postpones any kind of ruling on the merits, but a week or two, when we will be even closer to the election and it will be impossible for states to comply with some of the rules that will come out”.
As the North Carolina board of elections notes on its website: “Voting in the 2026 election officially begins on Sept. 4, with the initial sending of absentee ballots to voters who requested them.”
Trump knows Republicans ‘are unpopular and will lose in a free and fair election’, NAACP says
The president of the NAACP, which sued Donald Trump in April to block his order to restrict mail-in voting, denounced the supreme court decision that allows the order to be implemented, despite claims that it is illegal and unconstitutional.
The NAACP president, Derrick Johnson, said in a statement:
“Let this ruling be a reminder that democracy is never, ever, guaranteed. We have to fight for it, we have to fight to keep it, and we have to protect the rights we do have within it. Those in power know full well that they are unpopular and will lose in a free and fair election, and so they are trying to do everything they possibly can to make it difficult for you to vote.
Trump’s order has nothing to do with election integrity. It has everything to do with maintaining power at all costs.”
Trump administration plans to revoke up to 200,000 visas of asylum seekers – report
The Trump administration is preparing to revoke the business and tourism visas of up to 200,000 foreigners who have applied for or are currently seeking asylum status in the United States, according to US state department documents obtained by the Associated Press.
According to the documents and unnamed sources who spoke to the AP, the state department plans to announce within weeks the revocation of so-called B1 and B2 visas issued between 2016 and 2026, whose holders have sought or are now seeking asylum.
A state department spokesperson told the news agency it is working with the Department of Homeland Security on the push.
“We are coordinating with DHS to identify and revoke the nonimmigrant visas of foreigners who have come to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently,” the spokesperson, Tommy Pigott, said.
Pigott declined to confirm the number of visas that might be revoked, since “as the process will be ongoing, the number of revocations remains dynamic and will be done on a rolling basis.”
By allowing Trump to restrict mail voting, Justice Jackson says US supreme court ‘needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections’
The US supreme court’s decision on Monday that the Trump administration can move ahead with plans to restrict mail-in voting “needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections”, justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in a blistering dissent.
While the court’s unsigned opinion, from the six Republican-appointed justices, did not say that an executive order signed by Donald Trump to limit mail voting was legal, Jackson argued that permitting the administration to push ahead with changes, including a plan for the US Postal Service (USPS) to refuse to deliver ballots from voters not on a pre-approved list of eligible voters created by the federal government, “contributes to pre-election chaos instead of quashing it”.
“Our Constitution expressly delegates the power to conduct federal elections to the States,” Jackson wrote. In a 31 March 2026 executive order, Trump “attempted to alter this longstanding, constitutionally assigned structure” that “requires a fundamental overhaul of the States’ existing mail-in ballot systems—changing from a state-administered process to one in which the Federal Government controls who gets a ballot and whose vote counts”.
Jackson went on to accuse her conservative colleagues of “a stunning misinterpretation of the factual record” in their claim that a lower court had engaged in speculation that the United States Postal Service would change its rules to refuse to deliver mail ballots in states that did not turn over their voter rolls to the federal government. As Jackson notes, the USPS has proposed a change to its rules, which is scheduled to take effect this week.
“In the end, though, what makes today’s ruling so off-base is the Court’s lack of situational awareness regarding this equitable judgment,” Jackson writes in her conclusion. “Taking its eye off the ball, the majority misses the Government’s actual objective: to secure our imprimatur for its effort to foment chaos ahead of the November elections.”
US supreme court sides with Trump’s effort to curb mail-in voting
The US supreme court on Monday granted the Trump administration’s request to lift a lower court order that had blocked it from implementing Donald Trump’s executive order to restrict mail-in voting.
The decision by the court’s conservative majority, with its liberal members dissenting, appears to leave room for additional court challenges that could prevent the implementation of the new restrictions in time for the upcoming midterm elections in November, with some states beginning to send mail ballots to voters in just a few weeks.
The case could be one of multiple voting-related challenges before the justices. The justice department had filed an emergency appeal asking the high court to allow work on implementing the changes before the midterms.
Trump’s executive order, signed in March, calls on his administration to create lists of eligible voters and orders the US Postal Service (USPS) to deliver mail ballots only to people on those lists.
The USPS is prepared to publish a new rule this week to implement that change.
In dig at Ontario premier Doug Ford, Trump calls him less impressive than late brother Rob Ford, Toronto mayor caught on video smoking crack
As we mentioned earlier, Donald Trump quickly got personal in response to criticism of his new tariffs on Canadian imports from the conservative premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, by comparing him unfavorably to his late brother, Rob Ford, a former rightwing mayor of Toronto.
Writing on social media, Trump called the Ontario leader a “less charismatic, intelligent, and overall unimpressive” version of his brother. What makes the US president’s enthusiastic praise for the late Rob Ford is that he was best known outside Canada for one thing: having been caught on video smoking crack while serving as mayor.
While the video was not made public until after Rob Ford’s death in 2016, he admitted in 2013 that he had smoked crack, “probably in one of my drunken stupors” in 2012.
The same year, the Ford brothers met Trump at the opening of a new Trump International Hotel and Tower in Toronto.
During Trump’s successful campaign for the Republican nomination for president in 2016, Doug Ford expressed delight that Trump had used one of his brother’s slogans.
“It’s a real tribute and a real honour,” Doug Ford told the Toronto Sun.
“Full disclosure, I like Trump,” he added. “He’s not part of the Washington establishment or the Washington elites … I wouldn’t underestimate him.”
By last year, Doug Ford’s affection for Trump had waned so much that, as Ontario’s leader, he paid to have a television ad against Trump’s tariffs, featuring anti-tariff comments from Ronald Reagan, broadcast during the World Series, which infuriated Trump.
New poll shows record low support for war in Iran
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll shows that public approval for the war with Iran has dropped to its lowest level since the conflict’s early days at the end of February. Now, only 31% of Americans surveyed support military action in Iran, which is down from 34% earlier this month.
Notably, fewer Americans who identify as Republican support the war, according to the poll. That number now sits at 69%, compared to 77% in March.
This comes at a time when Donald Trump’s own approval rating hovers at a new low of 33%, according to recent polling.
Here’s a recap of the day so far
-
Scott Bessent announced today that the US has begun an “unprecedented” sanctions campaign against Iran “and its enablers”. A number of countries stand to face secondary sanctions, according to the treasury secretary. However, he did not say whether those, like China or Russia, would be impacted. He also did not set out a timeline for those countries to end doing business with Iran. “We know who they are, they know who they are, so when the hammer of US treasury actions falls upon them they will have no one to blame but themselves,” Bessent said, describing the new wave of sanctions as “economic asphyxiation” of the Iranian regime and “no one should test our resolve”.
-
Meanwhile, Donald Trump has threatened to increase tariffs on Canadian cars, trucks, auto parts and steel to 50% today, after trade negotiations between Washington and Ottowa broke down last week. On Truth Social, the US president blasted Canada and said the new duties will go into effect on 1 January 2027. “On Trade, and in other ways, also, they are among the worst Nations in the World to deal with. They feel entitled, and yet, WE DON’T NEED CANADA, THEY NEED US!” Trump wrote. This escalation comes after Canadian prime minister Mark Carney rejected the latest deal on Saturday, after Trump previously slapped a 50% tariff on $20bn worth of Canadian exports – ranging from hockey equipment to electronics.
-
In response, Mark Carney told reporters on Monday that Trump’s announcement was largely expected. “It’s not a surprise for us that the US would take some form of reprisal to our response to their unjustified tariff, which was on top of other unjustified tariffs,” he said from Quebec. “But what message does that send to the workers in Michigan, in Ohio, in Kentucky, in Alabama, who rely on Canadian demand?” he continued. “We’re their largest customer for automobiles, more than the European Union, Japan, Korea, many others combined, and the United Kingdom.”
-
Trump, however, continued a war of words with Ontario premier Doug Ford, who he said was displaying “lots of bluster”. Trump called Ford the “less charismatic, intelligent, and overall unimpressive” version of his brother Rob Ford, the former mayor of Toronto. Earlier, the Ontario premier said that Canada must “throw everything and the kitchen sink” at the US in the wake of Trump’s tariff announcement. “I have a lot of real estate on my ass, so he [Trump] has a lot of room to kiss my ass,” Ford told reporters on Monday.
-
Earlier, ahead of Trump announcing his latest threat to implement 50% tariffs on Canadian cars and auto parts, Jamieson Greer, the US trade representative, said that Canada is ultimately responsible for the collapsed talks over the weekend to reach a deal on the duties between the two countries and longtime allies. “We set about to finalize it, and then in the last hours, I think there were things that the Canadians just – you know, they wanted more,” Greer said today in an interview with CNBC. “They wanted more and we weren’t prepared to do that.”
Donald Trump said there is “lots of bluster” coming from Ontario premier Doug Ford, as the two engaged in a war of words on Monday.
The US president called Ford the “less charismatic, intelligent and overall unimpressive” version of his brother Rob Ford, the former mayor of Toronto.
Earlier today, Doug Ford said that Canada must “throw everything and the kitchen sink” at the US after Trump threatened to increase tariffs on Canadian auto parts and cars to 50%. “I have a lot of real estate on my ass, so he [Trump] has a lot of room to kiss my ass,” Ford told reporters today.
“The red states – we’re gonna hit hard,” the premier said. “You think an insult from him [Trump] hurts me? Bring it on, buddy. You’re a loser.”
On Truth Social, Trump remained bullish. “America has been carrying Canada for decades, but no longer! The U.S.A. will always be far bigger, richer, and stronger than Canada,” he wrote. “Without the United States, Canada couldn’t survive – It’s where they get all of their money and, because of their current bad leadership, primarily Governor Carney, and his Flunky, Ford, they will not be allowed to keep taking advantage of the United States – Their key to survival.”
By referring to Mark Carney, the prime minister of Canada, as a “governor”, Trump continues to brand the country as a “state” in the US. Earlier, in Maine, vice-president JD Vance repeated a similar posture.
“Remember, much of the Electricity, Oil, and Gas that Canada gets is transported through the U.S.A. Someone should get these clowns to “fall in line” or, the consequences for Canada will be far WORSE!” Trump added.
Joseph Gedeon
All US immigration officers working for a key anti-fraud unit have been reassigned by Donald Trump’s administration to focus on screening South African refugees and alleged “unlawful” voters.
Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate (FDNS) immigration officers have been shifted full-time on to two “high-priority” initiatives, according to internal correspondence seen by the Guardian, leaving US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) unable to provide officers to train asylum officers in “the near future”.
USCIS is inside the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which has led the president’s immigration crackdown during his second term. The processing of asylum claims has largely ground to a halt during Trump’s administration, leaving many seeking asylum in limbo.
“All FDNS IOs [immigration officers] have been reassigned full-time to one of two high-priority USCIS initiatives (South African refugee screening and unlawful voter screening),” an internal message, sent on Monday, said. “Because of this, we will not have the ability to assign IO’s [immigration officers] to the training portfolio for the near future.”
USCIS did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
FDNS is the USCIS unit responsible for detecting fraud and national security concerns in immigration benefit applications, including asylum claims. Its officers work with asylum offices to identify cases requiring further investigation, refer matters to law enforcement, and help asylum officers identify potential fraud and other red flags.
The reassignment marks a significant diversion of FDNS personnel. The message addresses only the agency’s ability to provide officers for asylum officer training; it does not say whether routine FDNS screening of pending asylum applications has also slowed or stopped.
A disruption to training would limit specialized instruction for asylum officers, and a broader slowdown in casework screening would have more direct consequences for pending applications. The Guardian has not independently confirmed whether routine asylum screening has been affected.
When asked why the US treasury department is not implementing sanctions immediately, Bessent said that it was to give nations who conduct business with Iran the “opportunity to remedy bad behavior”.
“Why would I want to blow up the global financial system?” he said. “We believe that it’s important to level set and give people a cure period. But they should know that will move very quickly, and that we are serious.”
Bessent evades questions about whether sweeping secondary sanctions will include China
Notably, during his press conference today, Scott Bessent didn’t specify which countries would be targeted by secondary sanctions, even when asked by reporters whether China – the largest importer of Iranian oil – would be impacted.
While Bessent said that “quiet diplomacy” is the best way to engage with countries who still maintain trade relationships with Iran, this latest move is an attempt to show that “no one is above” sanctions.
“We know who they are, they know who they are, so when the hammer of US treasury actions falls upon them they will have no one to blame but themselves,” Bessent said.
He described the new wave of sanctions as “economic asphyxiation” of the Iranian regime and “no one should test our resolve”.
The treasury secretary also said he would not “name names” about the world leaders that Donald Trump is in touch with when it comes to ending business with Iran.
Bessent also added: “I’m not going to set timelines, but we do not have infinite patience here.”
