Taegan Goddard is offering readers of electoral-vote.com a free trial subscription to the paid version of Political Wire. Here is the link.

Democracy 1, Trump 0

Yesterday, the Supreme Court denied Donald Trump's emergency application, in which he sought to put a hold on the preliminary injunction prohibiting the full implementation of the USPS rule controlling mail-in voting.

Though one can't be sure with the shadow docket, it appears to be a 7-2 decision, because the only dissents are from Associate Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas. Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh provided a brief concurrence, in which he declared that he was only denying the request for a stay because it would be "arbitrary and capricious" to apply the rule to the 2026 elections inasmuch "state and local elections officials do not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule before the elections." But he also noted that "there is at least a fair prospect" the postal service has the statutory authority to issue the final rule. That seems a bit ominous, but it looks likely there are six votes to strike the rule down altogether when it inevitably comes back to SCOTUS on the merits.

So, this case is far from over, but at least for the 2026 midterms, mail-in ballots will be delivered and returned as usual. Interestingly, the lower court's injunction only prohibits making states' cooperation with the final rule mandatory, though it still allows voluntary compliance. It's unclear what states, if any, have cooperated, and in what way since the database that postal workers are supposed to use to verify voter status for each ballot is not operational.

But that may be a moot point. SCOTUS' ruling applies in the case out of Boston brought by states and voters' rights groups and presided over by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani. But there is another case that was brought in D.C. that is currently in front of U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols. Late Sunday night, Nichols issued his own preliminary injunction prohibiting any implementation of the USPS rule, whether voluntary or otherwise. So, his injunction goes further than Talwani's injunction. Nichols, a Trump appointee, found that the USPS exceeded its authority in issuing the rule and, therefore, it is "ultra vires" and cannot be enforced.

Nichols' order reaches the opposite conclusion from the one in Alito's dissent. Contrary to Alito, Nichols found that the plaintiffs had, indeed, shown they were likely to succeed on the merits. In a case brought by the NAACP, LULAC and DSCC, Nichols held that the new envelope design requirements, the requirement for state officials to enroll each voter in the Federal Ballot Mail Portal, and the verification process for the first two steps by postal workers "exceed any conception of the outer bounds" of statutory authority for the USPS. "Nothing in the Postal Reorganization Act authorizes the Postal Service to impose new election procedures on state election officials, to create a data collection system for mail-in and absentee voters, or to refuse the transmission of lawful mail because it fails to meet these data collection requirements." Nichols notes that none of these requirements are "necessary" or "incidental" to the delivery or processing of mail.

Nichols' injunction applies nationwide (because the plaintiff organizations have members in all fifty states) and is not affected by SCOTUS' decision in the other case. This case could be where the action is going forward. In fact, it wouldn't surprise us if there were yet another "emergency" application on the Court's shadow docket to put this order on hold, so the Trump administration can at least lean on states to voluntarily participate in the scheme. In the meantime, however, the postal rule has been returned to sender. (L)

The Mitch Is Back

Sen. Addison Mitchell "Mitch" McConnell (R-KY) reported for work on June 11, the last day before the Senate took one of its many breaks. He suffered a still-shrouded-in-mystery health problem on June 14, and has been largely invisible since. Yesterday, he finally returned to work after 92 days off.

Clearly, the Senator is neither dead nor brain dead. So, those conspiracy theories are moot. On the other hand, McConnell arrived in a wheelchair yesterday, his speech was halting and occasionally slurred, his face looked somewhat droopy on the left side, and the media was not allowed to capture video footage of him. His official story remains that he suffered a fall, but all of this says "stroke" to us. Of course, if you have a stroke and collapse, or if you have a heart attack and collapse and suffer a stroke while blood is not circulating, then it's technically true you did fall; you're just not including some other relevant details. So, it's possible that the "I fell" story is a lie of omission, rather than a lie of commission.

McConnell said he might not be able to make it to the Senate for every vote, but that he'd be there for "tough" votes. There may not be too many of those left in his career; the upper chamber is scheduled to be in session for 13 days between now and the midterms, and another 22 days over the remainder of the year, and then he's an ex-Senator. That said, there is a farm bill that is currently tied up in committee that McConnell will help to advance to the floor, and it's "budget time" again, so there might (or might not) be appropriations bills to vote upon.

During his convalescence, McConnell collected approximately $43,857.39 in pay for days he was not working. Or, at least, days he was not at work. Over the course of his career, the Senator has voted against 23 different bills that would have created or extended medical leave for various employees. Undoubtedly, his experience has shown him the error of his ways, and if he gets a chance to vote on a 24th bill, he'll support it. Otherwise, some folks might suggest he's a hypocrite.

The McConnell fiasco, preceded by the Dianne Feinstein fiasco, has caused quite a few people to kvetch about the ironclad hold that sitting officeholders have on their jobs, and to call for some sort of system by which clearly incapacitated members of Congress can be removed. The prospects of this happening are roughly equivalent to the prospects of a snowball in hell. The members of each chamber are allowed to expel members by a two-thirds vote. However, there is no way that two-thirds of members will help to create that "tradition," for fear that they will be the ones targeted some day. It's the same reason that academic senates, made up of tenured faculty, virtually never vote to revoke tenure from one of their colleagues.

The other way it might be done is to create a constitutional amendment. But there's similarly no way that such amendment attracts the votes of two-thirds of members, particularly those in the old folks' home the Senate. And even if such an amendment were to make it through Congress, well, look how great a job they did at creating a mechanism for removing enfeebled presidents.

There does not appear to be any other member of the Senate who is skipping work right now (though it can be hard to tell, if they are gaming the system the way John Fetterman, D?-PA, does). So, at least on paper, the upper chamber is back to full strength. (Z)

Like Father, Like Son (and Son-in-Law)

It is unbelievable how everyone in Donald Trump's orbit is obsessed with money, regardless of how unethically they have to behave in order to obtain it. It is considerably more believable, if disappointing, how hypocritical the Trumps (and their enablers) can be, and have been, in pointing the finger at the alleged corruption of others (e.g., Hunter Biden) while doing things that are orders of magnitude more skeezy.

Two different stories of this sort broke yesterday, and we can't quite decide which one is worse. To start, Donald Trump Jr. married his new wife, Bettina Anderson, in a lavish affair held in the Bahamas. The tradition, of course, is that the bride's parents pay for the wedding. That said, if the groom's father is a billionaire sitting on a bunch of ill-gotten crypto gains, maybe he should be paying. Or there's the modern approach, where the married couple pay for the wedding themselves, and don't behave like the marriage is some sort of business arrangement between their two families.

ProPublica has discovered that Trump Jr. chose "none of the above." Although the First Son reportedly has a net worth north of $300 million, he decided to let a "friend" pick up most of the expenses, like the rent on the private island where the wedding was held, the cost of the private planes used to ferry people to the island, the fireworks show that came after "I do," and the five-layer cake that was airlifted in from Florida. That "friend" is Umar Kremlev, a Russian oligarch who is very close with Russian president-for-life Vladimir Putin.

Nobody who is willing to speak to the media knows exactly why Kremlev decided to be so generous. However, ProPublica did manage to find evidence suggesting that he and Trump Jr. have not known each other for very long—they are not, for example, college buddies, or longtime business partners. What it amounts to is that either the son of Trump is already a Russian asset, or he will be in the future. And he might know it, or he might not know it, although he certainly should know it. Russian oligarchs have much in common with the mafia, and one of those commonalities is that they do not do favors without expecting something return. Certainly, it is mind-boggling that Putin has been able to insinuate his tentacles so deeply into the Trump family and into the White House, and with nobody saying so much as "boo!"

At this point, readers might be saying, "Wait. You couldn't decide what was worse? How could something be worse than that?" In answer, we give you one Jared Kushner, who is both First Son-in-Law and also the Trump administration's all-purpose ambassador/diplomat/negotiator. As it turns out, according to a lengthy profile published yesterday in The New Yorker, young Jared has most certainly been putting the "dollar" in dollar diplomacy.

Kushner's only success as a diplomat, such as it is, is the Abraham Accords. However, that agreement largely just served to formalize a state of affairs that already de facto existed. And, in any case, it was during Trump v1.0. During Trump v2.0, Kushner and his negotiating partner Steve Witkoff have been an absolute disaster. Most obviously, they have made about as much progress toward making peace with Iran as we have. They have also failed to make headway in Ukraine.

However, in the process of failing spectacularly as a diplomat, Kushner has nonetheless done a heckuva job of lining his pockets. Effectively, the deal is that if a country wants a seat at the table while the fate of Iran, the Strait of Hormuz, the Middle East, etc. is discussed, they need to "invest" generously in Affinity Partners, which is Kushner's asset-management firm. Over the last year, he has "secured" another $5 billion in capital from various Middle Eastern nations. This despite the fact that he charges exorbitant rates for his so-called services, while not actually finding outlets for most of the investors' money.

The folks who run various Middle Eastern nations do not have a problem with pay-to-play, as such, since greasing peoples' palms is something of a tradition in that part of the world. However, when they do pay, they expect to get something in return. Thus far, the money they've given to Kushner has produced little, either in terms of profit, or in terms of geopolitics. So, they are not happy, to say the least.

The Democrats ostensibly intend to hammer on corruption as a big part of their midterm pitch. And, if they do, the First Son and the First Son-in-Law will be excellent cudgels for them to yield. Meanwhile, should the blue team get control of at least one chamber, Kushner figures to be right at the top of the "to do" list when it comes to investigations (Trump Jr. too, very possibly). And while their father-in-law/father is significantly shielded from consequences for his actions—due to SCOTUS making him a king, but also because he might not live long enough to face charges—Kushner and Trump Jr. are not so fortunate. So, it's well within the realm of possibility that one or both of them will eventually face the music. Of course, in Kushner's case, going to prison for white-collar crimes is a family tradition. (Z)

Bo French Is Not Backing Down

As we noted yesterday, Bo French (R) is running for Texas Railroad Commissioner right now, and is fueling his campaign with significant amounts of out-and-out bigotry. He hit the jackpot this weekend with an eX-Twitter post carping about all the brown University of Texas students attending this weekend's Ohio State game. It's now been viewed close to 50 million times.

French, not surprisingly, is not sorry. All of this attention is exactly what he wanted. Confronted by reporters yesterday, he said, "I think that the bigger conversation is, are we going to have policies to prioritize Americans... or are we going to have policies that prioritize foreigners? And I think most people in the America First movement think we ought to be prioritizing Americans." He has correctly summarized one of the core tenets of MAGA/America First, which is "prioritizing Americans." You just have to remember that by "Americans," French and the other MAGA zealots mean "white Americans."

French, of course, has no idea if the students in the photo he posted are American citizens; all he knows is that most of them are not white. That said, if someone had to guess, the smart guess would be that most or all of them are U.S. citizens. Here's reader R.T. in Arlington, TX, to explain:

I am not surprised at the demographics of the UT student body. A long-standing law, which used to be called the 10% rule, now the 8% rule, guarantees admission to either UT or Texas A&M for any public school student who graduates in the top 8% of their high school class. It is actually a problem for the universities, as they have to admit more freshman than their carrying capacity and then chase the excess off with extreme academic rigor in lower-division classes. Accentuated by white flight from public schools, that means that the UT student body cannot be lily-white because of a law that was designed to give opportunity to bright but economically poor students. True meritocracy inevitably leads to diversity.

Again, French doesn't really care whether or not these folks are Americans; he only cares whether or not they are white.

Our sense is that French is not helping his cause, or his party's cause, with that kind of garbage. Now, we do recognize that it's possible we are Pollyannas who fail to appreciate how well racism sells in Texas and/or the South. However, not long before we made today's posting live, Politico published a piece headlined "'Profoundly unhelpful': Texas Republicans worry Bo French's xenophobic posts make a tough year worse." The first bit of that headline is based on a quote in the article that comes from Republican strategist Matt Mackowiak, who said "His post on social media is profoundly unhelpful if his goal is to see Republicans win statewide races in a tough political environment in 50 days." So, we might just be right that this is bad for Republicans, even in Texas, and that the best thing for them to do would be to disavow French and his bigotry.

Another Republican strategist who is on board with us is the most famous GOP strategist in all of Texas, namely Karl Rove. He is so aggravated by French that he told a group of folks at a Republican luncheon yesterday that he's going to vote for a Democrat for the first time in 30 years—for French's opponent, state Rep. Jon Rosenthal. Rove joins Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) as to two highest-profile members of the Party to disavow French.

That said, neither Rove nor Cornyn carries anywhere near as much weight as they used to. If French really is hurting the GOP, then the very best thing would be for the guy who leads the party to denounce him. But that, as you might guess, is not what happened. Instead, Donald Trump got on his social media platform for the members of the white-sheet brigade to attack Rove:

Karl Rove is so bad for the Republican Party, and completely wrong so often. He suffers from a major case of Trump Derangement Syndrome primarily because, for almost 10 years, I beat back and won against so many of the people and things that he wanted and espoused. Why does FoxNews and the WSJ keep his RINO Voice alive. The guy is a stone cold loser!

So, if Texas Democrats want to make the case that the GOP is a racist party, from the head of the party on down, Trump and French are certainly doing their part to facilitate that argument.

Incidentally, the Democrat Rosenthal is a mechanical engineer with expertise in extraction. French comes from a family who is in the oil business, but he has spent his professional career largely in private equity. That probably means that Rosenthal is more qualified for the office to which they both aspire. Yesterday, we made a joke about how French has a 19th-century mindset, and so it makes sense that he aspires to a 19th-century job. We got plenty of e-mails asking us to clarify that. Here's the one from P.S. in Plano, TX:

Railroads are indeed a 19th century innovation, albeit one which remains an important part of present day cargo transportation. However, the Railroad Commission of Texas no longer has anything to do with regulating railroads and has not since 2005. Railroad regulation is handled by the Texas Department of Transportation.

What the Railroad Commission of Texas does regulate is oil, coal, and some uranium extraction. The most economically significant of those domains is oil extraction. The Texas oil boom began in 1901, and production has continued to climb through the present day, meaning that the Railroad Commission of Texas is regulating an industry that contributes approximately 10% of the state's entire GDP.

It would be good of you to publish this for the benefit of your readers in Texas. The Texas Railroad Commissioner is an elected official, and I'm sure the only reason the title of his position hasn't been changed is because he benefits from the lack of accountability that comes from voters being confused about his duties. Most voters probably just shrug and vote for Railroad Commissioner based on incumbency or party identification rather than what they think about how Texas regulates oil drilling. If the position were named more honestly, these elections would be higher profile and more politically competitive.

Thanks for the assist, P.S.

Anyhow, if French is not as qualified as his opponent, and if he's also an angry white guy, it may explain why his campaign is all about culture wars stuff, and he rarely actually mentions the issues that are relevant to the post of Texas Railroad Commissioner. Meanwhile, if James Talarico (D) somehow pulls out the win in the Senate race and French gives away his race to Rosenthal, then Katie bar the door. Two statewide wins for Democrats, after having been shut out in Texas for 32 years? Rightly or wrongly, everyone will be talking about how maybe the blue-ing of Texas has finally arrived. (Z)

One Last Hurrah Before Show Horse Al Green Is Put Out to Pasture

Rep. Al Green (D-TX) is, to be blunt, one of the showiest show horses in the House right now. He's somewhat famous for his stunts during Trump State of the Union addresses (having been ejected multiple times). That might make him feel good, and might burnish his political prospects, but he's often acting a way that is not so great for the image or the message of the Democratic Party as a whole.

Now, even if the stunts did burnish Green's political prospects, they apparently did not do so quite enough, as he will be out of a job in January. Thanks to redistricting, he ended up facing off against another sitting Democratic member of the House—Christian Menefee—in this year's primaries, and he lost badly, with Menefee taking 69.3% of the vote in the runoff to just 30.7% for Green. Voters may have preferred a younger representative, or perhaps one less enamored of shenanigans.

As he prepares to exit, though, Green has decided to pull one more trick out of his sleeve. For the eighth time since 2017, Green will use parliamentary maneuvers to force the House to vote on a measure to impeach Donald Trump.

The other Democrats in the House are furious, as this plays into the hands of the GOP. Leading into the midterms, it will allow Trump and other Republicans to argue that the Democrats just hate the President, and don't care about anything else. And in the next Congress, it will be easier to argue that any impeachment of Trump isn't legitimate, and is just another stunt. So, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) and the other blue-team pooh-bahs are trying hard to twist Green's arm to try to get him to forego his plans. But he doesn't care and, on top of that, there is none so free as someone who has nothing to lose.

Because the Democrats, by and large, don't particularly want to vote to impeach Trump right now (looks like a cheap stunt), but they also don't want to vote against impeaching Trump (suggests they are OK with his bad behavior), it is likely that a large number of them will just vote "present," or will somehow manage to be absent the day Green brings his bill to the floor. Last time Green did this (December of last year), 47 of them voted "present." That number might double or triple this time. (Z)

Today's Senate Polls

Nebraska is one of the "ties" on the map above. We've posted a note about this before, but we still get e-mails daily. We may come up with some addition to avoid confusion but, at very least, it will have to wait until the Votemaster is no longer traveling. Anyhow, Dan Osborn (I) is reportedly up 5 points on Sen. Pete Ricketts (R). Don't look now, but the last time Ricketts actually led in a poll was in February. There haven't been that many polls, so that's not quite as bad as it sounds, but still, an Osborn win is looking like it might actually be possible. (Z)

State	Democrat	D %	Republican	R %	Start	End	Pollster
Nebraska	No Democrat	0%	Pete Ricketts*	42%	Sep 08	Sep 13	SurveyUSA

* Denotes incumbent

---

Previous report         Next report

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.
• Guidelines for questions (Saturdays) and letters (Sundays)

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger