I respectfully dissent. States administering elections and the voting public that relies on them to do so deserve clarity, not caginess or confusion. The Court does a disservice to all concerned by distorting Article III standing and ripeness principles to issue a ruling that contributes to pre-election chaos instead of quashing it, and by using its equitable authority to facilitate a patently inequitable result.
-- Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in dissent after the majority ruled in Donald J Trump v California that the administration can, for the time being, move forward with its directives relating to citizenship lists and mail ballots (24 August 2026), h/t Law Dork, "What Monday’s Supreme Court election order ruling is and is not"
.jpg)

.jpg)



