Federal judge extends block on Trump order seeking to limit mail voting in the midterms

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-09-04 19:19:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump’s Push to Limit Mail Voting Blocked Again as False Claims Persist

A federal judge has once again blocked the implementation of President Donald Trump’s executive order seeking to restrict mail voting during the midterm elections, underscoring ongoing legal and factual disputes over Trump’s efforts to change voting procedures.

Trump’s Efforts to Restrict Mail Voting

Trump has repeatedly sought to limit mail voting, despite the fact that he himself frequently uses mail ballots. His administration’s latest attempt, through an executive order, aimed to impose new restrictions on the process, including a requirement for documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote. This order was quickly challenged in court and halted by federal judges, who ruled that the Constitution gives states—and, in some cases, Congress—the authority to set voting procedures, not the president.

False Claims About Mail Ballots

Trump has falsely blamed mail balloting for his 2020 election loss, spreading baseless claims of fraud. These assertions have been widely debunked, but Trump has continued to promote them as justification for his efforts to change longstanding voting procedures. Despite these claims, there is no evidence to support widespread fraud in mail voting, and Trump’s attempts to alter the system have so far been unsuccessful.

Legal Setbacks and Ongoing Litigation

After Trump issued his mail voting executive order in March, multiple lawsuits were filed by Democrats and voting rights groups. U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani, appointed by President Barack Obama, placed an initial hold on the order, citing the risk of significant disenfranchisement for eligible voters if states were forced to change their systems so close to the election. The Supreme Court later overturned that hold, not on the merits of Trump’s order, but because the lawsuits were filed before the Postal Service had issued its rule on implementation. Once the rule was released, the lawsuits were refiled, and Judge Talwani extended her prohibition against the order’s implementation.

Conclusion

President Trump’s ongoing campaign to restrict mail voting has been marked by repeated legal defeats and the spread of false claims about election fraud. Despite his personal use of mail ballots, Trump continues to push for changes that courts have found unconstitutional or procedurally improper. As the legal battles continue, the facts remain unchanged: there is no evidence to support Trump’s claims about mail voting fraud, and his efforts to limit mail voting have so far failed to overcome judicial scrutiny.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/federal-judge-extends-block-on-trump-order-seeking-to-limit-mail-voting-in-the-midterms

‘Not feasible’: With ballots already in the mail, election officials say it is too late for Trump’s USPS order

Politics — 2026-09-04 13:00:00 — www.politico.com

President Donald Trump’s push to overhaul the U.S. Postal Service’s handling of mail-in ballots has once again stirred controversy and legal battles, as North Carolina becomes the first state to send out ballots for the upcoming November election.

Trump’s Executive Order and Unsubstantiated Claims

In March, Trump signed an executive order targeting mail-in voting, a process he has repeatedly alleged—without evidence—is vulnerable to widespread voter fraud. This order sought to give the federal government unprecedented control over state-run elections, requiring the Postal Service to refuse delivery of ballots from states that did not comply with new federal requirements, such as providing lists of eligible mail voters or using approved envelope designs.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Fraud Claims

Despite Trump’s frequent assertions, the excerpt makes clear that his claims of mail-in voting being a “vector for widespread voter fraud” are not supported by evidence. Election officials and experts from both parties have criticized these allegations, warning that they fuel confusion and undermine public trust in the electoral process. As noted by Ben Hovland, a former Democratic commissioner with the Election Assistance Commission, “none of these claims of voter fraud are backed up with facts,” yet they risk causing Americans to lose faith in the voting system.

Legal and Logistical Chaos

Trump’s administration has pressed the courts to allow these new rules to proceed, even as a federal judge’s order has paused their implementation. The administration recently asked the Supreme Court to lift the hold, arguing that the measures are “commonsense” protections for ballot security. However, election officials warn that enforcing such sweeping changes so close to Election Day would create chaos, administrative burdens, and the potential for widespread disenfranchisement. Critics argue that the rule’s requirements—such as last-minute changes to ballot handling and tracking—are impossible to implement in time and would not actually improve election security.

Conclusion: Undermining Confidence, Not Securing Elections

President Trump’s continued push for federal intervention in mail-in voting, based on unsubstantiated claims of fraud, has drawn bipartisan criticism and legal resistance. Election officials stress that these efforts risk sowing confusion, increasing administrative errors, and discouraging voter participation. As the courts weigh the future of Trump’s order, the central fact remains: there is no credible evidence to support the president’s repeated claims of widespread mail-in ballot fraud, and the proposed changes threaten to disrupt the very process they purport to protect.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/09/04/trump-mail-ballots-order-november-elections-01065234

Trump offers first comments on Lindsay Clancy case

Administration News — 2026-09-04 15:54:00 — thehill.com

President Trump Calls Lindsay Clancy Mistrial a “Horrible Tragedy”

President Trump weighed in Friday on the high-profile Lindsay Clancy murder trial after a judge declared a mistrial, marking his first public response to a case that has drawn national attention. When asked about the judge’s decision during an executive order signing ceremony, the president responded, “It’s a shame. It’s a horrible tragedy.”

Trump’s brief remarks focused on the emotional impact of the case, which has been closely followed across the country. By characterizing the outcome as both a “shame” and a “horrible tragedy,” the president signaled his awareness of the public’s concern and the gravity of the situation.

No False Claims or Attacks in Statement

In this instance, President Trump did not make any false claims, exaggerations, or disparaging remarks about individuals involved in the case. His comments, as reported, were limited to expressing sympathy and regret over the mistrial and its circumstances.

Conclusion

President Trump’s response to the Lindsay Clancy mistrial was measured and focused on the tragic nature of the case. While his statement did not include any misstatements or attacks, it underscores the national significance of the trial and the attention it has received at the highest levels of government. Readers should note that, in this instance, Trump’s remarks were straightforward and did not contain the types of distortions or falsehoods that have characterized some of his previous public statements.

Source article

Source: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/6072371-trump-lindsay-clancy-trial-comments-mistrial/

Donald J. Trump: “RT @realDonaldTrumpI am pleased to report that Michael Cohen, the Prosecutio…

Trump's Truth – Latest Posts — 2026-09-04 11:35:00 — trumpstruth.org

Trump Claims Michael Cohen Has “Recanted” Testimony, Calls for Dismissal of Legal Cases

Donald Trump has asserted that Michael Cohen, described as the “Prosecution’s Star Witness and, in actuality, only Witness” in the New York State Attorney General and Manhattan District Attorney cases against him, has “fully RECANTED his testimony.” Trump claims Cohen was “pressured” and “coerced” to provide false statements and thanks Cohen for what he calls an “Act of Bravery.” Trump further demands that “any remnant of those Politically Weaponized Cases against me be immediately terminated and dismissed,” alleging that the cases were “WRONG and UNLAWFUL.” He accuses Letitia James and Alvin Bragg of breaking the law to prevent him from becoming President.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

False Claim: Cohen Has “Fully Recanted”
There is no public evidence that Michael Cohen has “fully recanted” his testimony. Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, has consistently testified against Trump in multiple legal proceedings and has not issued any statement retracting his previous testimony. Trump’s claim that Cohen was “pressured” and “coerced” to lie is not supported by any documented evidence or court filings.

Distortion of Legal Proceedings
Trump refers to the New York cases as “Politically Weaponized” and claims that the prosecutors “broke the Law” to target him. These accusations are not substantiated by any findings from the courts overseeing these cases. Both Letitia James and Alvin Bragg have pursued legal actions based on evidence reviewed by grand juries and judges, not on political motivations as Trump alleges.

Exaggeration of Cohen’s Role
Trump states that Cohen is the “only Witness” in these cases. In reality, both the Attorney General’s civil fraud case and the Manhattan DA’s criminal case have involved multiple witnesses and extensive documentary evidence beyond Cohen’s testimony.

Attacks and Unsubstantiated Allegations

Trump’s statement includes direct attacks on Letitia James and Alvin Bragg, accusing them of illegal conduct without providing evidence. He also characterizes the entire legal process as an effort to prevent his presidential ambitions, a claim that has not been corroborated by any independent investigation or court ruling.

Conclusion

Donald Trump’s latest statement repeats several false and unsubstantiated claims regarding the legal cases against him in New York. There is no evidence that Michael Cohen has recanted his testimony or that prosecutors have acted unlawfully. Trump’s repeated attacks on the integrity of the justice system and those involved in his cases continue a pattern of public statements that distort the facts and undermine confidence in legal institutions. Readers should be aware that these claims are not supported by the available evidence or by the public record of the proceedings.

Source article

Source: https://trumpstruth.org/statuses/41513

Arab diplomats fear Iran is widening the war — and there’s no way out

Donald Trump — 2026-09-04 11:01:00 — www.politico.com

Trump Downplays Iran Threat as Regional Powers Sound Alarm

Donald Trump is downplaying Iran’s threat at a time when regional powers are increasingly concerned that Iran is ramping up its activities. As the midterm elections approach, Trump’s posture toward Iran stands in stark contrast to the growing anxiety among U.S. allies in the Middle East.

Trump’s Position: Downplaying the Iran Threat

According to the report, Trump is minimizing the significance of Iran’s actions in the region. This stance comes despite mounting evidence and warnings from regional powers who fear that Iran is escalating its military and political influence. Trump’s approach suggests a lack of urgency or concern about Iran’s recent maneuvers, which many experts and foreign officials view as destabilizing.

Regional Concerns and Contradictions

While Trump continues to downplay the situation, neighboring countries and U.S. partners are voicing alarm. They argue that Iran is not only increasing its regional activities but also taking advantage of perceived U.S. disengagement. This contradiction between Trump’s dismissive attitude and the concerns of those closest to the conflict raises questions about the administration’s strategy and the potential consequences of underestimating Iran’s ambitions.

Implications for U.S. Policy and the Midterms

Trump’s posture toward Iran could have significant implications for U.S. foreign policy and the upcoming midterm elections. By downplaying the threat, Trump risks alienating key allies and undermining efforts to contain Iran’s influence. The divergence between his position and the views of regional powers highlights a critical debate over how best to address Iran’s actions and protect U.S. interests.

Conclusion

Trump’s tendency to minimize the threat posed by Iran stands in sharp contrast to the concerns of regional powers who fear escalation. As the midterms approach, this disconnect could shape both U.S. foreign policy and the political landscape at home. The facts suggest that Trump’s downplaying of Iran’s activities is at odds with the reality on the ground, leaving allies and analysts questioning the wisdom of his approach.

Source article

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/09/04/iran-escalation-us-midterms-01065126

Trump threatens trade war if rates aren't cut after strong jobs report

Administration News — 2026-09-04 11:04:00 — thehill.com

President Trump Pressures Federal Reserve After Strong Jobs Report, Threatens Trade Action

President Trump called on the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates Friday, despite a stronger-than-expected August jobs report. The president went further, threatening to cut off trade with several countries if the central bank does not reduce rates.

Jobs Report Exceeds Expectations

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that U.S. employers added 162,000 jobs last month, a figure significantly higher than the 53,000 many analysts had anticipated. This robust jobs growth typically signals a healthy economy and would not usually prompt calls for lower interest rates.

Trump’s Pressure on the Fed

Despite the positive economic news, President Trump urged the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates. He linked his demand to the jobs report, suggesting that the central bank’s current policy was not sufficient, and escalated his rhetoric by threatening to cut off trade with several countries if the Fed did not act.

Fact-Check: Trump’s Claims and Threats

The president’s threat to cut off trade as leverage against the Federal Reserve is notable. The Federal Reserve operates independently of the executive branch, and its decisions are not typically influenced by threats related to international trade. Furthermore, the strong jobs report undermines the argument for immediate rate cuts, as lower rates are generally used to stimulate a lagging economy, not one showing unexpected strength.

Conclusion

President Trump’s call for the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, paired with threats to international trade, stands in contrast to the positive economic data released Friday. The president’s statements highlight his ongoing efforts to pressure the central bank, even when economic indicators suggest a different course of action. This episode underscores Trump’s willingness to use aggressive rhetoric and threats, even in the face of facts that challenge his position.

Source article

Source: https://thehill.com/business/6071563-trump-trade-war-fed-interest-rates-august-jobs-report/

What to know about mail-in voting and Trump’s order : NPR

NPR Topics: Politics — 2026-09-03 15:48:00 — www.npr.org

Trump’s Push to Restrict Mail-In Voting Faces Legal and Factual Challenges

President Trump directed the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to implement new restrictions on mail-in voting for the midterm election, claiming the move was necessary to stop illegal voting by non-U.S. citizens. This directive, issued through a March executive order, has become the subject of a heated legal battle and widespread scrutiny.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims

Trump’s justification for the USPS plan centers on preventing illegal voting by non-citizens. However, many studies and audits cited in the reporting show that illegal voting by non-U.S. citizens is “incredibly rare.” This directly contradicts the premise of Trump’s order and highlights a pattern of exaggeration regarding the prevalence of voter fraud.

The USPS Plan and Its Impact

Under the Trump administration’s plan, state election officials would be required to provide lists of mail-in voters’ names and addresses to USPS and include specific barcodes on ballot envelopes. USPS has stated it would not deliver ballots for election officials who do not comply. However, a federal judge in Boston has temporarily blocked key parts of the plan, meaning voting by mail remains available to eligible voters as usual for the upcoming midterms.

Concerns Over Disruption and Implementation

Election experts warn that it is too late to implement the USPS plan without causing significant disruptions. A whistleblower report alleges that USPS has not properly tested the online system intended to collect voter information and that new verification policies could prevent many voters from receiving their ballots in time—or at all.

Legal Arguments and Ongoing Court Battles

While USPS claims its revised rule is simply an effort to regulate mail, challengers argue the agency lacks authority to control voting by mail. The Supreme Court has ruled on a procedural aspect of the case but has not yet addressed the legality of Trump’s order or the USPS plan itself.

Conclusion

President Trump’s attempt to restrict mail-in voting is based on claims of widespread illegal voting by non-citizens—claims that are not supported by available evidence. As the courts continue to weigh the legality of the administration’s actions, key parts of the plan remain blocked, and mail-in voting is expected to proceed as normal for the midterms. This episode underscores the importance of fact-checking official claims and the ongoing debate over voting rights and election integrity.

Source article

Source: https://www.npr.org/2026/09/03/nx-s1-5955614/trump-mail-in-voting-ruling-court-usps

North Carolina Set to Mail The Fall’s First Ballots As Trump Tries to Restrict Them

NYT > U.S. > Politics — 2026-09-04 05:29:00 — www.nytimes.com

Donald Trump’s False Claims About Mail Voting Persist as North Carolina Begins Sending Ballots

As North Carolina becomes the first state to send out mail ballots for the upcoming election, the Trump administration is escalating efforts to restrict vote-by-mail practices, citing unsubstantiated claims of widespread fraud. President Trump has repeatedly promoted false claims of mail voting fraud, despite voting by mail himself in two elections this year.

False Claims and Political Motives

Trump has asserted, without evidence, that mail voting is rife with fraud and that tens of thousands of noncitizens are illegally registered to vote. These claims have been widely debunked, yet they continue to shape his administration’s push for new restrictions. The administration is attempting to enforce a rule that would require states to hand over voter data and use specific ballot envelopes for verification, threatening to withhold mail delivery of ballots in noncompliant states.

Impact on the Election Process

The timing of these proposed changes has drawn criticism from election officials across the country. With only nine weeks until the election, many states say it is impossible to comply with the new requirements. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the rule, warning it could cause “major disenfranchisement” of voters. Meanwhile, the Trump administration has made an emergency request to the Supreme Court to allow the rule to take effect, arguing that the freeze harms the government and the public.

Political Strategy and Consequences

While Trump claims his goal is to protect election security by disqualifying ineligible voters, he has also suggested that restricting mail voting would benefit Republicans. This stance has led opponents to believe the administration’s actions are intended to interfere with the election results, particularly as Democrats have increasingly relied on mail voting in recent years.

Conclusion

Despite repeated false claims from President Trump about mail voting fraud, there is no evidence to support his assertions. The administration’s ongoing efforts to impose new restrictions have raised concerns about voter disenfranchisement and the integrity of the election process. As North Carolina and other states move forward with mail voting, the legal and political battles over access to the ballot continue to intensify.

Source article

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/04/us/politics/north-carolina-mails-first-ballots-of-fall-as-trump-tries-to-restrict-them.html

Donald J. Trump: “I can’t believe Maria Bartiromo is no longer going to have her great show(s)…

Trump's Truth – Latest Posts — 2026-09-03 21:10:00 — trumpstruth.org

Trump Praises Maria Bartiromo, Claims Her Shows Were “Always Number One”

In a statement, Donald Trump expressed disbelief and disappointment over the end of Maria Bartiromo’s programs on Fox News and Fox Business, calling her “a total professional, and a true warrior.” Trump asserted, “Three different shows, always number one,” and predicted, “Her fans, of which there are many, will not be happy.”

Trump’s Claims About Bartiromo’s Ratings

Trump’s statement that Bartiromo’s shows were “always number one” is a sweeping claim about her ratings performance. While Bartiromo has hosted several programs across Fox platforms, independent ratings data show that her shows have not consistently held the top spot in their time slots or across cable news. For example, “Sunday Morning Futures” has performed well but has faced strong competition from other cable news programs, and her weekday shows have not always led in viewership.

Pattern of Exaggeration

This latest statement continues Trump’s pattern of exaggerating the success of allies and friendly media figures. By declaring Bartiromo’s shows were “always number one,” Trump overstates her ratings record, echoing a broader tendency to inflate achievements and dismiss unfavorable facts.

Conclusion

Trump’s reaction to Bartiromo’s departure highlights his loyalty to supportive media personalities and his ongoing use of hyperbolic language. The claim that her shows were “always number one” does not align with independent ratings data, reflecting a familiar pattern of exaggeration in Trump’s public statements. Readers should approach such claims with scrutiny and seek out objective sources for media performance data.

Source article

Source: https://trumpstruth.org/statuses/41504

Trump again appeals to Supreme Court on mail voting restrictions as midterms loom

PBS News Hour – Politics — 2026-09-03 19:25:00 — www.pbs.org

Trump Administration Pushes Supreme Court to Allow Controversial Mail Ballot Rule Amid System Uncertainty

The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to overturn a federal judge’s order blocking a new rule that would regulate mail ballots, even as officials could not confirm whether the computer system central to the plan was operational. The administration’s appeal came just before North Carolina was set to send out mail ballots, marking the start of a nationwide wave of mail voting ahead of the midterm elections.

Trump’s Executive Order and Legal Challenges

Under President Donald Trump’s executive order, the U.S. Postal Service could refuse to deliver ballots from states that do not use a uniform envelope style and do not submit lists of eligible voters to an online portal. This portal, according to court testimony, was still inactive as of Thursday, raising questions about the feasibility of implementing the rule in time for the election.

During a hearing in Boston, U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani pressed the Department of Justice on whether the Postal Service could actually carry out Trump’s plan. The judge noted a lack of evidence that the system was ready, describing the situation as an “experiment” with the upcoming election.

Trump’s Record on Mail Voting

President Trump has long opposed mail voting and has falsely blamed it for his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden, despite the fact that he himself often votes by mail. The administration maintains that the changes to mail ballot procedures are minor and legal, arguing that states cannot use federal mail services for elections while ignoring Postal Service regulations.

Election Officials Warn of Chaos

Election officials across the country have warned that complying with the new directives would require a complete overhaul of their operations, including redesigning envelopes and uploading voter lists to the still-inactive portal. Some ballots have already been sent out in Wisconsin, and North Carolina is set to begin mailing ballots to all requesting voters.

A whistleblower report released this week cautioned that the new requirements could result in millions of mail ballots never being sent. The rule mandates that all ballots be physically brought to post offices before mailing, and if a single barcode error is detected, entire batches—potentially tens of thousands of legitimate ballots—could be discarded.

Conclusion

The Trump administration’s push to enforce new mail ballot rules, despite unresolved technical and legal questions, has sparked a flurry of litigation and concern among election officials. Trump’s ongoing opposition to mail voting, including his repeated false claims about its integrity, continues to shape the debate as the courts weigh whether the administration’s last-minute changes can proceed ahead of the midterm elections.

Source article

Source: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-again-appeals-to-supreme-court-on-mail-voting-restrictions-as-midterms-loom