3 ms·

Supreme Court Allows Trump Plan to Restrict Mail-In Voting, for Now

28 points by mikhael 1mo ago

deleted 1mo ago
[deleted]
msie 1mo ago
Alas, evil wins again. The fix is in.
firefax 1mo ago
this is why dropboxes at local election offices are of vital importance (and possibly, a militia, if things get bad enough.)
- cosmicgadget 1mo ago
  Dropboxes won't help if you don't receive the ballot in the first place.
  - firefax 26d ago
    And an AR-15 can't take out an Apache, we take too much shit off these militia types.
like_any_other 1mo ago
Nearly every country in the world restricts mail-in voting (context that is predictably omitted from the article [1]): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voting [1] At least from the first six paragraphs that I was able to unpaywall.
- goatlover 1mo ago
  It's not the Federal government's job to run elections. That's up to states. It's in the Constitution. This is all a BS issue anyway because Trump doesn't want to lose control of Congress. It's blatantly obvious what he's doing. Nobody should fall for it.
- nmeagent 1mo ago
  What nearly every country in the world does or does not do has absolutely no bearing on this issue in the United States.
  - like_any_other 1mo ago
    If we're going to claim restricting mail-in voting is an assault on democracy, it's very relevant that the great majority of countries we call democracies also do it.
    - cosmicgadget 1mo ago
      Step back from the voter disenfranchisement angle and consider how it's being done.
      - like_any_other 1mo ago
        Your words, posted after my democracy comment: "It's kind of genius - use the one federally-controlled element of voting to disenfranchise your opponents, doing it so late that the courts can't rule in time." - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 Are you going to issue a correction to that post, that actually it's not disenfranchisement at all, that restricted mail voting is perfectly democratic, and your only objection is that the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed?
        cosmicgadget 1mo ago
        Lol, "are you going to issue a correction!?!" It's absolutely an attempt at disenfranchisement, the administration has been pretty clear about this. I asked you to also consider the other angle, it doesn't somehow invalidate the president's objective. > the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed? Tell me, what is the correct procedure for this, under the US Constitution?
        1mo ago
- Arnt 1mo ago
  I come from one of the countries on that list, and from a quick glance mine is one of the more restrictive one. Yet I've voted by mail in ~10 elections and the restrictions haven't bothered me, ever, so based on a sample of one the restrictions have no practical effect. They didn't block me from voting, they didn't even inconvenience me. Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect, or are intended to have no practical effect?
  - like_any_other 1mo ago
    > I come from one of the countries on that list Okay, let's be less vague then: Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Czechia, Slovakia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Romania, Moldova, Mexico, and Egypt have mail voting only for citizens abroad. France, Iceland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Turkey, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea, Madagascar, and every single country in South America (except Guyana and Suriname) have no mail voting whatsoever. As a glance at the map in the wiki article will reveal, this is not even half of the list. Are all of them disenfranchising their voters, and failing to live up to the promises of democracy, specifically because of the lack of mail voting? > Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect I think even if he bans voting by mail entirely, it would be consistent with the majority of democracies in the world, and would not reduce democracy in any way. In fact it would strengthen it, because one can have more trust in the legitimacy of each vote. I grant that this part is subjective, but the consistency with other democracies is fact.
    - econ 1mo ago
      What does seem unique is the obligation to pay income tax living abroad. It seems to make no sense to have a say if you aren't going to pay for anything. My Aunt moved to Australia 60 years ago. She should vote how my tax is spend? She had a very busy life, she should make time to watch dutch propaganda TV? She also doesn't like the idea of being counted as someone who didn't vote. We likewise have lots of immigrants who vote in their "home" country they don't live in or never did.
      - 1mo ago
mandeepj 1mo ago
The same supreme court who refused to take the guy off ballots in 2024 by saying they can't interfere in the elections - is repeatedly interfering in the elections this year.
- hn_acker 1mo ago
  That (6 justices in) the Supreme Court is > repeatedly interfering in the elections this year is not an exaggeration [1]: > If a year out is “too close” for a federal court to act in Texas, what’s the argument for the Supreme Court’s May 4 ruling issuing the judgment immediately in Callais, or its May 11 ruling issuing a GVR in the Alabama cases? [1] https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/231-the-death-of-purcells-principle https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/231-the-death-of-purcells-pri...
cosmicgadget 1mo ago
It's kind of genius - use the one federally-controlled element of voting to disenfranchise your opponents, doing it so late that the courts can't rule in time. UPS, Fedex, DHL, and Amazon have the chance to do the funniest, most patriotic thing.

28 points by mikhael 1mo ago

deleted 1mo ago

[deleted]

msie 1mo ago

Alas, evil wins again. The fix is in.

firefax 1mo ago

this is why dropboxes at local election offices are of vital importance (and possibly, a militia, if things get bad enough.)

cosmicgadget 1mo ago
Dropboxes won't help if you don't receive the ballot in the first place.
- firefax 26d ago
  And an AR-15 can't take out an Apache, we take too much shit off these militia types.

like_any_other 1mo ago

Nearly every country in the world restricts mail-in voting (context that is predictably omitted from the article [1]): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_voting [1] At least from the first six paragraphs that I was able to unpaywall.

goatlover 1mo ago
It's not the Federal government's job to run elections. That's up to states. It's in the Constitution. This is all a BS issue anyway because Trump doesn't want to lose control of Congress. It's blatantly obvious what he's doing. Nobody should fall for it.
nmeagent 1mo ago
What nearly every country in the world does or does not do has absolutely no bearing on this issue in the United States.
- like_any_other 1mo ago
  If we're going to claim restricting mail-in voting is an assault on democracy, it's very relevant that the great majority of countries we call democracies also do it.
  - cosmicgadget 1mo ago
    Step back from the voter disenfranchisement angle and consider how it's being done.
    - like_any_other 1mo ago
      Your words, posted after my democracy comment: "It's kind of genius - use the one federally-controlled element of voting to disenfranchise your opponents, doing it so late that the courts can't rule in time." - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49427947 Are you going to issue a correction to that post, that actually it's not disenfranchisement at all, that restricted mail voting is perfectly democratic, and your only objection is that the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed?
      - cosmicgadget 1mo ago
        Lol, "are you going to issue a correction!?!" It's absolutely an attempt at disenfranchisement, the administration has been pretty clear about this. I asked you to also consider the other angle, it doesn't somehow invalidate the president's objective. > the correct procedures for how the change is made are not being followed? Tell me, what is the correct procedure for this, under the US Constitution?
        1mo ago
Arnt 1mo ago
I come from one of the countries on that list, and from a quick glance mine is one of the more restrictive one. Yet I've voted by mail in ~10 elections and the restrictions haven't bothered me, ever, so based on a sample of one the restrictions have no practical effect. They didn't block me from voting, they didn't even inconvenience me. Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect, or are intended to have no practical effect?
- like_any_other 1mo ago
  > I come from one of the countries on that list Okay, let's be less vague then: Portugal, Belgium, Italy, Czechia, Slovakia, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Romania, Moldova, Mexico, and Egypt have mail voting only for citizens abroad. France, Iceland, Croatia, Bulgaria, Serbia, Ukraine, Turkey, Israel, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea, Madagascar, and every single country in South America (except Guyana and Suriname) have no mail voting whatsoever. As a glance at the map in the wiki article will reveal, this is not even half of the list. Are all of them disenfranchising their voters, and failing to live up to the promises of democracy, specifically because of the lack of mail voting? > Do you think Trump's restrictions will have no practical effect I think even if he bans voting by mail entirely, it would be consistent with the majority of democracies in the world, and would not reduce democracy in any way. In fact it would strengthen it, because one can have more trust in the legitimacy of each vote. I grant that this part is subjective, but the consistency with other democracies is fact.
  - econ 1mo ago
    What does seem unique is the obligation to pay income tax living abroad. It seems to make no sense to have a say if you aren't going to pay for anything. My Aunt moved to Australia 60 years ago. She should vote how my tax is spend? She had a very busy life, she should make time to watch dutch propaganda TV? She also doesn't like the idea of being counted as someone who didn't vote. We likewise have lots of immigrants who vote in their "home" country they don't live in or never did.
    - 1mo ago

mandeepj 1mo ago

The same supreme court who refused to take the guy off ballots in 2024 by saying they can't interfere in the elections - is repeatedly interfering in the elections this year.

hn_acker 1mo ago
That (6 justices in) the Supreme Court is > repeatedly interfering in the elections this year is not an exaggeration [1]: > If a year out is “too close” for a federal court to act in Texas, what’s the argument for the Supreme Court’s May 4 ruling issuing the judgment immediately in Callais, or its May 11 ruling issuing a GVR in the Alabama cases? [1] https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/231-the-death-of-purcells-principle https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/231-the-death-of-purcells-pri...

cosmicgadget 1mo ago

It's kind of genius - use the one federally-controlled element of voting to disenfranchise your opponents, doing it so late that the courts can't rule in time. UPS, Fedex, DHL, and Amazon have the chance to do the funniest, most patriotic thing.