Trump's secret Supreme Court scheme EXPLODES into spotlight

It's clear by now that Donald Trump will. try every avenue he can to try and. interfere in the upcoming election. Now. it seems like he's got the Supreme Court. hooked into this. Mark, can you explain. what the new news is for voter. suppression as far as the Supreme Court. is concerned? >> Yeah, the Department of Justice has. filed an emergency appeal in the United. States Supreme Court. This will go to. the so-called shadow docket because. obviously the justices are not around. for the summer. They're off doing. whatever they do. Uh and this is over a. uh case that was filed in Massachusetts. by 23 Democratic Attorneys General to.

block Donald Trump's second executive. order trying to target voting. This is. the one in which he's essentially trying. to co-opt the Postal Service and the. Department of Homeland Security to try. to keep uh people from being able to to. vote. Uh he they the Department lost uh. at the trial court level. The First. Circuit agreed with the lower court. And. now the Department of Justice has taken. this all the way to the US Supreme Court. and asked the Supreme Court to throw out.

this lawsuit on the grounds that it is. not ripe, that the that that essentially. it's too early, Brian, to bring this. case. You and you could only imagine. what their argument will be if they. prevail here and then the case is. brought later. >> So just just to be clear here, if the. Supreme Court does rule that the. existing rulings in the Massachusetts. District Court and the First Circuit. Court of Appeals, if they aren't ripe, that would eliminate all of their. rulings against the White House and. instead keep as the law of the land the.

executive order that Trump passed where. he seeks to ban mail-in voting. Is that. correct? >> Yeah, it doesn't ban mail-in voting. So. essentially what this executive order. did is a few things. First is it. required the Department of Homeland. Security to work with the Social. Security Administration to create this. database of of you know, citizens, non-citizen, whatever, that they would. then send to the states with the. implicit threat, you better use this. data to screen your own voter rolls.

because one of the other provisions is. that they are going to prioritize. criminal investigations of state. officials. who allow non-citizens to vote. So, you. pair together, you could see what's. going on there. But, the headline. provision, the one that you're referring. to that most people have. latched onto is that states would be. required to send to the US Postal. Service a list of all of the voters who. they believe are eligible to receive. mail-in ballots. They'd have to do that.

60 days in advance of the election, and. then the Postal Service would not send. mail-in ballots to anyone not on that. list. And again, the assumption is that. DHS and the Department of Justice would. screen off of that list or send to the. Postal Service names that should not. receive mail-in ballots. So, that's what. the executive order did. What the first. circuit found holding trial court is. that the states, the Democratic states. that sued, they have suffered a concrete.

injury because they have to deal with. preparing for elections, and that will. include having to prepare these lists to. go to the Postal Service. It'll also. have to include making preparations for. the possibility that. you know, that that that DHS or the. Postal Service won't allow some people. to vote. And so, that's enough of a. concrete injury. The the Department of. Justice has has brought this case to the. Supreme Court, and interestingly, Brian, they are not saying that the executive.

order issued by the president is. constitutional. They are not saying that the executive. order issued by the President of the. United States complies with existing. federal law. Instead, what they're. saying is, "You know, Brian, maybe Mark. Wayne Mullin won't actually do the thing. that Donald Trump's asked him to do. Right. Just maybe Todd Blanche will be. like, 'You know what, Mr. President, we're not interested in your input in. what we who we investigate." And just. maybe the Postal Service, notwithstanding the fact that it is.

currently initiating a rule making to do. exactly the thing Donald Trump says, maybe then the Postal Service will be. like, "You know what, White House, we. don't care what you think. We're going. to carry all the mail-in ballots uh no. matter what." And so therefore the none. of this is ripe for legal challenge. right now, and it should all be. dismissed. And you know, maybe later if. the Postal Service and DHS and the. Department of Justice do the things that. the White House has asked them to do, maybe then the Democratic states can sue. or in a parallel case that I've been.

involved in out of Washington, D.C., the. Democratic Party can sue. But we know, Brian, that the administration is going. to do exactly what Donald Trump asked. them to do. We know that they are taking. those steps right now because they're. telling us they're taking those steps. right now. And we know that the reason. why the Department of Justice is. hitching its wagon to this rightness. argument is it has no defense on the. merits to this, and it will argue when. we would later file this lawsuit, when. the states would later file this. lawsuit, they'll say, "Oh, you know.

what? I'm sorry, court, it's too late. Right. Percell, it's too late. You know, we we've already made a million. preparations based on the you know, based on this executive order and based. on all these other things. It's too late. to not do these things for 2026. So. maybe these legal challenges could be in. place for 2028, but it's too late for. 2026." It's really cynical, and it goes. to show just how desperate Republicans. and this White House are to make it. harder for people to vote and easier for. them to cheat. >> Well, it's clear, if you're a judge and.

you're hearing this and you're hearing. the Trump administration say, "Well, you. know, we don't know that this is set in. stone already because maybe the USPS. will defy Donald Trump. Maybe the DOJ. will defy Donald Trump. Maybe Mark. Meadows and and DHS will defy Donald. Trump." Don't these judges have. discretion, enough discretion to be able. to say, "Well, look, that's complete. Of course these people are. going to kowtow to Donald Trump. Of. course they're going to be loyal to him. That's their first, second, and third. priority in terms of being in his. cabinet in the first place." So, like,

can't they use that discretion and not. suspend uh suspend reality in deference. to whatever argument the DOJ is making? >> See, I think you put your finger on it. in that last phrase. I don't think this. is a question of discretion. I think this is a question of deploying. basic common sense. This is a matter of. not being willfully blind. I mean, the. the the Department of Justice wants. these judges to close their eyes to. reality. I mean, let's start with DHS. Mark Meadows Mullins has given several.

press conferences, including the day. after the the the, you know, the. ridiculous speech that Donald Trump gave. in the Oval Office, in which he is. railing about how you see these blue. states are allowing non-citizens to. vote, and how he is threatening, remember he was threatening that there. would be criminal prosecution if in fact. these blue states allowed these uh the. these these folks to vote and did not. use the DHS DHS voter rolls. The Postal. Service has already announced that they.

are doing a rulemaking to implement uh. this policy. And Todd Blanche, I mean, really? We think Todd Blanche might not. uh. follow the uh directions uh of the White. House in what what kinds of criminal. cases to prioritize? >> come on, Mark. That's that's unfair. He. did say he loves Donald Trump, and even. if he got fired, he would still love. him. But other than that, what's there. to what's there to suggest that this guy. is a blind sycophant for the guy for for. the president? >> Right. So, for the Supreme Court, their.

choice right now. is whether they uphold the first circuit. because they are willing to see reality, to use your your words, as it clearly. is. >> Yeah. >> Or whether they are going to put on the. blinders that the white hat that the. Department of Justice has asked them to. put on and suspend reality and say, "Oh, maybe there's independence in all of. these agencies and they will defy Donald.

Trump.". >> Mark, I want to ask about the the. the likelihood of the Supreme Court. upholding this, but I I want to give a. quick note to folks who are watching. right now. Obviously, the implications. for upcoming elections are are hugely. important. Mark and his team are the. ones litigating this stuff on the front. lines in the courts. So, if you're. looking to support his work, the single. best way to do that is to subscribe to. Democracy Docket, which is the news. outlet Mark founded to focus on. everything legal, democracy, voting. rights, you name it. This is a great way.

to amplify his voice, a great way to. show some support for his work, and a. great way to show some support for the. absolutely critical litigation that. we're seeing right now. So, I'm going to. put that link to Democracy Docket right. here on the screen and also in the post. description of this video. Back to that question, likelihood of the. Supreme Court actually deferring not to. the lower court rulings, but to the DOJ. when they say, "Oh, you know, this is. this is not yet ripe and so the. executive order has to be the law of the. land.". Look, I I like to think that the Supreme.

Court will not shield itself from what. everyone is seeing. And by the way, it's not just what. everyone is seeing. It's actually shield. yourself from what Donald Trump. and his cabinet regularly tell us. >> Yeah. >> I mean, the whole theory of unitary. executive is that Donald Trump gets to. direct his administration and they have. to follow it. And certainly, the you know, the. sycophantic behavior we see at cabinet. meetings, that the statements that we.

see from Todd Blache, as you mentioned, that he loves Donald Trump, from Mark. Wayne Mullin, the fact that the Postal. Service hopped to immediately. Like, I'd. like to think that on a 9-0 basis, the. Supreme Court would say, "This is enough for it to be ripe.". Because after all, remember, for it to. be ripe, it just has to be enough. activity that the states. are reasonably acting. to counteract it, right? I mean, like. like the the states just all the states. have to say say is like, "Look,

we have to spend a dime, a dollar, $10, right? Anything. We have to spend money. to prepare for this. because it's not remote enough that we. can ignore it." And I like to think the. Supreme Court would agree on 9-0 that. that's the case. I don't think they will. agree 9-0. Again, this is on the shadow. docket. We may not ever know the exact. vote count. Um but I I I hope that there. is at least a majority of this court. that, you know, in the post-Watson. world, where, you know, the.

administration, you know, doing the. bidding of the RNC and the RNC in that. case tried to mail-in voting, that they will they'll get what's going. on here. And they won't allow it. And. they will affirm the the first circuit. Uh and this executive order will be. blocked. Because again, like, there's. not really much of a debate right near. right now about whether Donald Trump. actually has the authority. to order this the the these actions. The. DOJ is trying to play a shell game in. preventing the courts from getting to.

that question by by by specu- by by. engaging in this alternate reality. >> Well, obviously, a lot to continue. focusing on here. Mark, your news. outlet, democracydocket, has been doing. excellent coverage, daily coverage on. exactly this. So again, for those who. are watching right now, to stay on top. of this issue, both subscribe to. Democracy Docket, which the link is. right here on the screen, and also. subscribe to this channel, where we'll. continue to talk about this issue as we. head toward midterms. I'm Brian Tyler. Cohen. >> I'm Marc Elias. >> This is Democracy Watch.