>> ONE OF THE ISSUES THREATENING TO SHAKE UP THE U. S. MIDTERMS, THE FUTURE OF MAIL-IN BALLOTS.

A THIRD OF AMERICANS BALLOTS MAY BE AT RISK.

THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE IS RUSHING TO LAUNCH A FAULTY NEW DIGITAL SEASON IN LINE WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP'S ORDER FOR MORE FEDERAL CONTROL OVER MAIL-IN VOTING AHEAD OF NOVEMBER.

NOW ACCORDING TO THIS UNNAMED DISCLOSURE, THIS WHISTLE-BLOWER, A SINGLE SCANNING ERROR AMONG TENS OF THOUSANDS OF BALLOTS COULD MEAN NONE WOULD REACH ANY VOTERS.

THIS COMES AS THE SUPREME COURT HAS LIFTED ONE OF TWO INJUNCTIONS BLOCKING THE PRESIDENT'S EXECUTIVE ORDER.

SO WHAT HAPPENS NOW?

DEREK MULLER IS A PROFESSOR OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME, AND HE'S JOINING HARI SREENIVASAN TO DISCUSS THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE SUPREME COURT RULING.

>> CHRISTIANE, THANKS.

DEREK MULLER, THANKS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

WE HAVE NOW EXPERIENCED OVER THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS A CONVERSATION ABOUT MAIL- IN VOTING THAT MOST PEOPLE THOUGHT WAS SETTLED.

THE PRESIDENT, FOR HIS PART, HAS CALLED IT LOTS OF THINGS, AND WE'LL GO INTO THAT.

BUT HE SIGNED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER.

AND IN THERE, IT SAYS THIS IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S ROLE AS AN UNAVOIDABLE DUTY UNDER ARTICLE II OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES TO ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW WHICH INCLUDES PREVENTING VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAW AND MAINTAINING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN ELECTION OUTCOMES.

PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN ELECTION OUTCOMES.

WHAT ARE THE MAIN THINGS THAT THIS ORDER DIRECTS STATES TO DO?

>> RIGHT.

SO THE ORDER REALLY HAS TWO COMPONENTS HERE.

ONE PART OF THE ORDER DIRECTS THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO GATHER INFORMATION ABOUT CITIZENS WHO WOULD BE POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE VOTERS AND TO TRANSMIT THOSE LISTS OF CITIZENS TO THE VARIOUS STATES.

AND THAT PART OF THE ORDER DOESN'T REALLY TELL THE STATES TO DO ANYTHING, ALTHOUGH I THINK THERE IS AN IMPLICATION THAT WHEN THEY GET THAT LIST, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO ACT.

AND IF THEY FAIL TO ACT, THERE MIGHT BE SOME INVESTIGATIONS BEHIND IT.

THE OTHER PART OF THE ORDER, WHICH HAS GOTTEN A LOT MORE OF THE ATTENTION IN RECENT WEEKS HAS BEEN SOME DIRECTIVES TO THE POSTAL SERVICE TO STANDARDIZE THE ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPE FORM TO REQUIRE BAR CODES ON ALL ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPES.

SOME STATES ALREADY REQUIRE THIS, BUT NOT ALL OF THEM.

AND THEN PERHAPS MOST CONTROVERSIALLY BEFORE ANY STATE CAN MAIL OUT ITS ABSENTEE BALLOTS, IT NEEDS TO SEND A LIST OF ALL THE INDIVIDUALS IT INTENDS TO SEND THE BALLOTS TO, THEIR NAME, THE ADDRESS AND THE BAR CODE.

AND ONLY THEN WILL THE POSTAL SERVICE MAIL THOSE BALLOTS OUT ONCE IT HAS THATLESS.

SO THOSE ARE SORT OF THE MAJOR COMPONENTS OF WHAT HAS COME OUT OF THIS RULE.

>> MOST PEOPLE THINK THE EXECUTIVE ORDER IS TRYING TO TELL THE STATES TO DO SOMETHING.

BUT TECHNICALLY, THE PRESIDENT DOESN'T RUN ELECTIONS.

STATES RUN THEIR ELECTIONS, RIGHT?

BUT THE PRESIDENT AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS IN CHARGE OF DHS AND THE POSTAL SERVICE.

SO IT SEEMS LIKE STRATEGICALLY, THIS IS A DIFFERENT WAY TO TRY TO ACCOMPLISH THE SAME RESULT, WHICH IS TO TRY THE GET THE STATES TO DO WHAT YOU WARMFRONT TO DO.

>> YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.

THE CONSTITUTION SAYS FOR FEDERAL ELECTIONS, IT'S REALLY LEFT TO THE STATE LEGISLATURES TO COME UP WITH THOSE RULES.

CONGRESS CAN COME IN AND PROVIDE RULES.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN A RANGE OF WAYS OVER THE YEARS, WHETHER IT'S THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT OR THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OR THE HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OR THESE OTHER THINGS WHERE CONGRESS DOES EMPOWER A LOT OF FEDERAL AGENCIES TO ENGAGE IN SOME INVOLVEMENT IN HOW STATES RUN ELECTIONS.

BUT IT STILL IS PRINCIPALLY LEFT TO THE STATES.

THE PRESIDENT FORMALLY HAS NO ROLE IN THAT PROCESS, CAN DIRECT THE AGENCIES TO DO THINGS.

THIS IS WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THAT TENSION, THAT THE PRESIDENT IS DIRECTING THE POSTAL SERVICE, DIRECTING THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO ENGAGE ACTS THAT CAN AFFECT THE ELECTIONS EVEN IF HE HAS NO DIRECT AUTHORITY OVER THEM.

SO WE'RE SEEING NOW THIS SORT OF TENSION PLAYING OUT OVER HOW MUCH THE EXECUTIVE CAN DO WITHOUT THAT EXPLICIT CONGRESSIONAL GUIDANCE, BUT SOME IMPLICIT GUIDANCE GIVEN TO THE GENERAL AUTHORITY OF THE POSTAL SERVICE, THE GENERAL AUTHORITY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, AND HOW MUCH THOSE AGENCIES CAN SORT OF PUT PRESSURE ON THE STATES TO INVESTIGATE THINGS, TO DOUBLE-CHECK THINGS, TO CHANGE THEIR BEHAVIOR, MODIFY THEIR BEHAVIOR GWYNN THIS EXECUTIVE OVERSIGHT.

>> LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROBLEM THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SOLVE.

THE PRESIDENT HAS GONE OUT OF HIS WAY TO SAY "MAIL-IN VOTING MEANS MAIL-IN CHEATING.

I CALL IT MAIL-IN CHEATING, AND WE GOT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT ALL. "

THAT WAS HIS QUOTE FROM MARCH OF 2026.

AND JUST FOR OUR AUDIENCE'S REFERENCE POINT, THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF HAS USED MAIL-IN BALLOTS TO VOTE, RIGHT?

SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM HE IS TRYING TO SOLVE?

>> RIGHT.

SO MILLIONS OF AMERICANS USE ABSENTEE BALLOTS, ESPECIALLY OUR MILITARY AND OVERSEAS PERSONNEL, ESPECIALLY ELDERLY AND SENIOR CITIZENS.

THERE HAS BEEN A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION SINCE COVID FOR A RANGE OF REASONS RELATING TO ABSENTEE BALLOTS.

REALLY, THE CONCERN THAT HE HAS IS THE SUGGESTION THAT WHEN BALLOTS GO OUT, THERE IS A LOSS OF CONTROL FROM THE STATE AND THEY ARE THEN SENT OUT TO INDIVIDUALS WHO COULD FILL THEM OUT ON BEHALF OF SOMEBODY ELSE, OR WHO COULD PRESSURE PEOPLE AT HOME TO SUBMIT THEM.

BALLOT FRAUD IS RARE.

ABSENTEE BALLOT FRAUD HAPPENS.

IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO HAPPEN THERE WAS A CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION IN NORTH CAROLINA IN 2018 THAT WAS THROWN OUT BECAUSE A COUPLE HUNDRED BALLOTS WERE FOUND TO HAVE BEEN CAST UNDER FRAUDULENT SIRVEGS.

BU --CIRCUMSTANCES.

BUT AGAIN, THESE THINGS ARE VERY RARE.

WHAT KINDS OF OVERSIGHT ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE GIVEN THE LOW RISK THAT WE HAVE FOR THEM.

SO THIS IS THE CONSTANT BACK AND FORTH FOR THE PRESIDENT.

THE RISK IS EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH.

PROBABLY NOT TRUE.

THE QUESTION IS HOW MUCH THAT REMEDY SORT OF FITS THE PROBLEM THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE.

>> OKAY.

SO THE COURTS HAVE GOTTEN INVOLVED BECAUSE STATES IMMEDIATELY CHALLENGED THIS IDEA.

IT'S GONE UP TO THE SUPREME COURT AND BACK DOWN TO SOME FEDERAL LEVELS.

WHERE ARE WE IN THAT?

>> IT'S EXTREMELY COMPLICATED, EXTREMELY FAST-MOVING.

AND WHATEVER I SAY RIGHT NOW MIGHT BE MOOTED IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE, BUT I'LL GIVE YOU THE LAY OF THE LAND THAT A FEDERAL COURT IN MASSACHUSETTS ENJOINED OPERATION OF THE RULE.

THE SUPREME COURT SEVERAL DAYS AGO SAID WE ARE LIFTING THAT INJUNCTION BECAUSE IT'S TOO EARLY.

WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RULE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE.

IT'S JUST A PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE AS OPPOSED TO A RULE FROM POSTAL SERVICE.

BUT NOW THE POSTAL SERVICE HAS COME OUT WITH A RULE.

AND A FEDERAL COURT HAS AGAIN ENJOINED IT SAYING, LOOK, YOU ARE AHEAD OF YOUR SKIS, IF YOU WILL.

YOU ARE EXERCISING TOO MUCH AUTHORITY THAT IS NOT GIVEN TO YOU UNDER THE STATUTE POSTAL SERVICE.

YOU CAN'T POINT TO SOMETHING IN THE STATUTE THAT LETS YOU DO THIS.

BUT IT'S UNDER A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER BECAUSE IT'S HAPPENING SO QUICKLY.

BALLOTS GO OUT IN NORTH CAROLINA THIS FIRST WEEK OF SEPTEMBER.

AND WE ARE IN SEPTEMBER RIGHT NOW.

SO THIS IS HAPPENING ON A VERY COMPRESSED TIMELINE.

THE CASE IS BEING APPEALED.

I ANTICIPATE IT WILL GO TO THE SUPREME COURT IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE.

AS OF RIGHT NOW, IT'S ON HOLD, BUT YOU NEVER KNOW WITH THE SORT OF DYNAMIC LITIGATION WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN NEXT.

>> THE SUPREME COURT, THE FIRST TIME THEY LOOKED 59 IT, THEY DIDN'T LOOK AT THE MERITS OF WHETHER OR NOT THESE EXECUTIVE ORDERS ARE OVERSTEPPING THEIR BOUNDS.

THEY'RE JUST SAYING WELL, THIS IS THEORETICAL.

THIS ISN'T REAL YET.

NOW IF IT GOES BACK TO THE SUPREME COURT, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SAY LISTEN, HERE'S THE POSTAL SERVICE.

THEY PUT OUT THEIR GUIDANCE.

>> YES, THIS IS ABSOLUTELY REAL.

AND THE COURT HAS A LINE IN ITS OPINION SAYING WHEN THE ORDER IS ISSUED TELLING STATES HOW TO BEHAVE WITH RESPECT TO THEIR VOTER LIST, OF COURSE THEY HAVE STANDING.

OF COURSE THEY HAVE ABILITY TO CHALLENGE THIS RULE.

SO THEN A LOT WILL FOCUS ON FIRST WHETHER OR NOT THE POSTAL SERVICE HAS THE AUTHORITY IN THE FIRST PLACE.

FINALLY GETTING BACK TO THAT MERITS QUESTION.

AND THEN SECOND, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S TOO CLOSE IN TIME TO THE ELECTION EITHER FOR A COURT TO ISSUE AN ORDER OR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO TRY TO CHANGE THE RULES OF THE ELECTION.

AGAIN, TENS OF THOUSAND OF ELECTION OFFICIALS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES ARE PRINTING ENVELOPES AND PROCESSING ABSENTEE VOTER APPLICATIONS TO CHANGE HOW THEY'RE BEHAVING RIGHT NOW AT THIS LATE DATE WOULD BE EXTRAORDINARILY DISRUPTIVE.

>> JUSTICE JACKSON HAD SAID IN HER OPINION, "CONTRIBUTING TO ELECTORAL CONFUSION OF THE EVE OF VOTING IN THE NEXT EIGHT WEEKS. "

IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY IF SOME STATES TRY TO COME UP WITH NEW BALLOTS, OTHER PLACES CAN'T AND WE HAVE THIS MISHMASH?

>> I THINK YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AN IMPORTANT POINT HERE.

IF WE THINK ABOUT ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPES, MAYBE IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE A STANDARD DESIGN, TO HAVE BAR CODES ON THEM, AS MANY STATES DO.

AND MAYBE THAT COULD HAPPEN IN 2028.

BUT TO THINK ABOUT MAKING THAT HAPPEN FOR 2026 IS FUNDAMENTALLY UNREALISTIC FOR MANY JURISDICTIONS.

VENDORS REQUIRE A LOT MORE LEAD TIME ESPECIALLY IN RURAL AND SMALLER JURISDICTIONS.

IT'S AN EXTRAORDINARY COST AND EXTRAORDINARY TIME CRUNCH.

SO FOR SOME OF THOSE DISSENTING JUSTICES THAT ARE WORRIED ABOUT CHAOS, I WOULD ONLY RESIST IN THE SENSE THAT I DON'T WANT TO OVERSTATE THE CHAOS FROM THE VOTERS' PERSPECTIVE.

I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF CHAOS COMING FROM ELECTION ADMINISTRATORS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GET THESE ABSENTEE BALLOTS OUT IN TIME.

AND IDEALLY, IF THINGS WORK SMOOTHLY, VOTERS WON'T NOTICE MUCH DIFFERENCE AT ALL.

MAYBE THERE ARE ABSENTEE BALLOTS ARRIVE A COUPLE OF DAYS LATER BUT HOPEFULLY THERE WOULDN'T BE MUCH DISRUPTION.

THE REAL PROBLEMS IS IF THESE RULES, THE POSTAL SERVICE ITSELF CAN'T ADMINISTER.

AND THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF SUGGESTION IN RECENT DAYS THAT THE POSTAL SERVICE IS NOT GOING HAVE THE CAPACITY TO APPROVE ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPES.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO CLEAR LISTS OF MILLIONS OF ABSENTEE VOTERS ACROSS THE 50 STATES AND ACROSS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF ZIP CODES THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE APPROVING IT.

IT'S GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE TO IMPLEMENT IT.

AND IF THAT DOES HAPPEN, THEN WE MIGHT START TO SEE THE CHAOS HITTING VOTERS.

>> YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING THAT'S INTERESTING, THE WAY THAT DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS WOULD DEAL WITH IT.

I WOULD IMAGINE A CITY LIKE NEW YORK OR A CITY LIKE LOS ANGELES HAS A MUCH LARGER BUDGET TO TRY TO DEAL WITH THESE POPULATIONS.

BUT LET'S TAKE A SMALL RURAL COUNTY SOMEWHERE.

FIRST OF ALL, WOULD THEY WANT TO SPEND THEIR MONEY, IF THEY EVEN HAD IT?

>> WE HAVE A VERY LARGE NATION WITH A VERY DIVERSE APPROACH TO HOW IT ADMINISTERS ELECTIONS.

ADMINISTERING ELECTION IN THE BRONX LOOKS VERY DIFFERENT THAN ADMINISTERING THE ELECTION IN NOME, ALASKA.

IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO IT.

DISTANCES MATTER.

BUDGETS MATTER.

THE NATURE OF YOUR VOTERS MATTER, HOW LIKELY THEY ARE TO SHOW UP IN PERSON OR HOW FAR THEY WOULD HAVE TO TRAVEL TO VOTE IN PERSON.

WHAT'S HAPPENING IN HOLESVILLE, MISSOURI IS GOING TO LOOK DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S HAPPENING IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.

SOME STATES CAN PROBABLY ADAPT MORE EASILY.

SOME ARE ALREADY PUTTING BAR CODES ON THEIR ABSENTEE BALLOT ENVELOPES.

OTHERS HAVE PREFERRED OTHER WAYS.

IN VERY RURAL JURISDICTIONS ONLY HAVE A HANDFUL OF ABSENTEE BALLOTS THEY'RE MAILING ANY WAY.

SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET UP TO THE HOST HIGH- TECH WAYS OF DELIVERING THOSE BALLOTS.

ONE BENEFIT OF OUR SYSTEM IS THE DECENTRALIZED FLEXIBILITY THAT WE GIVE TO THOSE OFFICIALS.

AND REALLY, ONLY WHEN CONGRESS STEPS IN WITH ITS REASONED NATIONWIDE DELIBERATION IN THINKING ABOUT HOW THESE CHANGES ARE GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED LIKE THE HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002, DO WE THEN STEP IN AND PROVIDE SOME OF THAT GUIDANCE AND FLEXIBILITY TO HOW JURISDICTIONS DO IT.

WITH THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER, NOT SO MUCH FLEXIBILITY.

>> WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT LISTS, IT AUTOMATICALLY SETS OFF ALARM BELLS FOR LOTS OF PEOPLE.

HOW WAS THE LIST GENERATED IN THE FIRST PLACE?

HOW CURRENT IS IT?

HOW RELIABLE IS IT?

WHAT IS THE DATA SOURCES GOING INTO IT, WILL EVERYBODY HAVE ACCESS TO THE LIST AT THE SAME TIME?

AND WHAT WILL THEY DO WITH THE LIST.

WHAT DO THEY CROSS-CHECK IT AGAINST.

THE LIST OF CITIZENS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BY THIS EXECUTIVE ORDER IS SUPPOSED TO HAND OUT TO STATES, WHAT ARE THE CHALLENGES WITH IMPLEMENTING SOMETHING LIKE THIS?

>> I IMAGINE IF YOU'RE A JURISDICTION LOOKING AT THIS AND TRYING TO ACT IN GOOD FAITH, YOU SAY THIS IS ONE MORE PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT WE USE WITH OUR LIST MAINTENANCE PROCESS IN THE STATE.

MAYBE WE CAN USE IT ON SOME OF OUR DOWNTIME IN EARLY 2027 TO SAY LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE LIST AND WE FIND PEOPLE WHO ARE LISTED AS CITIZENS, THAT'S GREAT.

BUT IF YOU'RE NOT ON THE LIST, IT SHOULDN'T BE PRESUMED THAT YOU'RE NOT A CITIZEN.

AGAIN, THERE ARE MISMATCHES AND INCONSISTENCIES.

WHEN YOU SEND TO IT ONE STATE, IT'S PROBABLY OUT OF DATE THE DAY YOU SEND IT BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE HAVE DIED OR SOME PEOPLE HAVE MOVED OUT OF THE JURISDICTION OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

SO IT'S ALWAYS A CHALLENGE.

BUT I THINK THAT THE REAL CONCERN IS THAT IF YOU SEND JURISDICTIONS AN INCOMPLETE LIST, WHICH THIS ASSUREDLY WOULD BE, IS THERE AN EXPECTATION THEN THAT SOME PEOPLE WILL THINK IT'S THE COMPLETE LIST IF YOU ARE NOT ON THE LIST, YOU ARE NOT A CITIZEN, THAT STATES NEED TOE TAKE ACTION AS A RESULT OF IT.

I THINK THAT'S THE GREATEST CHALLENGE.

IT CAN BE USEFUL AS DATA POINT, A PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT SUPPLEMENTS WHAT YOU'RE DOING IN THE STATE.

BUT AT ITS WORSE, IT CAN SPIRAL TO MORE CONSPIRACIES ABOUT HOW NONCITIZENS ARE ON YOUR VOTER ROLES.

>> OORDER ALSO TELLS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES TO PRIORITIZE IN INVESTIGATING AND PROSECUTING ELECTION OFFICIALS AND OTHERS WHO VIOLATE FEDERAL ELECTION LAW.

AND, AGAIN, I THINK EVERYBODY WOULD AGREE THAT IF THERE ARE VIOLATIONS OF ELECTION LAW, THAT PEOPLE SHOULD BE PROSECUTED.

BUT I WONDER IF THERE ARE CIVIL SERVANTS, IF THERE ARE NONPARTISAN FOLKS WHO ARE VOLUNTEERS WHO MIGHT BE A CHILLING EFFECT FROM THIS.

>> YES.

I THINK PEOPLE UNDERESTIMATE HOW MUCH WE RELY ON VOLUNTEER AND LOW PAID VOLUNTEERS REALLY TO WORK THE POLLS ON ELECTION DAY TO ADMINISTER ELECTIONS.

THEY'RE HUMAN BEINGS AND THEY MAKE MISTAKES, BUT THEY DO THE BEST THEY CAN.

MANY JURISDICTIONS TRY TO HAVE BIPARTISAN OVERSIGHT OF WHAT'S HAPPENING DELIBERATELY FOR THAT REASON.

I'VE WORKED POLLS IN CALIFORNIA AND IOWA.

AND WHAT HAPPENS WE TRY TO HAVE A REPUBLICAN AND A DEMOCRAT EACH SIGNOFF ON THE VOTING MACHINES THE BEGINNING OF THE DAY AND THE END OF THE DAY AND THE ELECTION DAY TAPE TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING LOOKS GOOD.

SO THERE IS A LOT OF OVERSIGHT.

BUT WHEN YOU STOP IN AND SUGGEST THERE IS SOMETHING MAYBE NEFARIOUS THAT ELECTION OFFICIALS ARE DOING OR SAYING THEY NEED TO BE PROSECUTED, THERE IS THAT RISK THAT ELECTION OFFICIALS SAY LISTEN, I CAN QUIT AND FIND A BETTER JOB ELSEWHERE THAT HAS MORE STABLE HOURS THAN TRYING TO WORK AROUND THE CLOCK FOR THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

IT IS A MATERIAL RISK.

I THINK THERE ARE MANY THAT HOPE THAT IT'S JUST BLUSTER FROM THE ADMINISTRATION.

IT'S SENDING OUT LETTERS.

IT'S SENDING OUT THINGS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO LEAD TO ANY ACTUAL PROSECUTIONS.

SO FAR IN THESE TWO YEARS OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF INVESTIGATIONS AND BLUSTER WITHOUT THAT PROSECUTION, WITHOUT THE ACTUAL CARRY-THROUGH.

BUT I THINK THE LOOMING QUESTION IS WOULD THERE BE A CARRY-THROUGH ONE DAY.

>> THERE IS ALSO SPECULATION THAT THIS IS TARGETING DEMOCRATS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN THESE BIG SHIFTS IN WHO USES --I REMEMBER COVERING SOME OF MY FIRST ELECTIONS AND IT WAS LOPSIDEDLY OLDER VOTERS FOR SURE, BUT ALSO REPUBLICAN VOTERS THAT USE THE MAIL.

AND NOW ACCORDING TO THE 2024 M. I. T. ELECTION DATA SCIENCE LAB, IT SAYS THE PARTISAN DIVIDE IN MAIL- IN VOTING CONTINUED WITH MORE DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS UTILIZING THIS METHOD WITH 37% OF DEMOCRATS REPORTING VOTING BY MAIL COMPARED TO 24% OF REPUBLICANS.

THAT'S A DECREASE FROM 60% FOR DEMOCRATS AND 32% FOR REPUBLICANS BACK IN 2020.

THESE SHIFTS ARE SIGNIFICANT, AND THEY'RE TRENDING OVER TIME.

>> RIGHT.

SO I THINK THERE IS A COUPLE OF THINGS TO HIGHLIGHT WITH THE AGGREGATE STATISTICS.

MANY IS MANY JURISDICTIONS LIKE CALIFORNIA AND WASHINGTON HAVE LEANED VERY HEAVILY INTO ALL MAIL OR ALL ABSENTEE BALLOT ADMINISTRATION OF ELECTIONS.

SO IN ONE SENSE, THAT CAN SKEW THE NUMBERS A LITTLE BIT IN THE AGGREGATE TO SAY DEMOCRATS ARE USING IT AT A HIGHER RATE.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT.

AFTER 2020 AND COVID, THE SORT OF DECISION DO I VOTE REMOTELY OR IN PERSON BECAME THIS SORT OF PROXY FIGHT WELL, IS IT SAFE TO GO OUT OR SHOULD I STAY HOME AND TRY TO PROTECT THOSE WHO ARE IMMUNOCOMPROMISED AND NOT TRY TO SPREAD THE VIRUS.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, SINCE 2020, WE'VE CONTINUED TO HAVE THAT UNUSUAL DIVIDE IN HOW WE APPROACH ELECTIONS AND CASTING OF BALLOTS.

AND NOW REPUBLICANS ARE VERY SKEPTICAL OF IT.

AS YOU POINT OUT, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

25 YEARS AGO YOU WOULD SAID THE MILITARY, THE ELDERLY, THE RELIABLY REPUBLICAN VOTERS WOULD HAVE HEAVILY RELIED ON ABSENTEE BALLOTS.

IT'S SORT OF FLIPPED OVERNIGHT.

I THINK THE QUESTION GOING FORWARD IS HOW MANY OF THOSE BALLOTS ARE JUST MATTERS OF CONVENIENCE AND PEOPLE CAN GO TO THE POLLING PLACE ON ELECTION DAY IF THEY'RE WORRIED ABOUT IT VERSUS HOW MANY TRANSLATE INTO BALLOTS THAT ARE NOT RECEIVED AT THE END OF THE DATE.

AND AGAIN, HOPEFULLY, FROM AN ELECTION ADMINISTRATION STANDPOINT, WE DON'T SEE MANY HICCUPS AT ALL, AND THE VOTERS EXPERIENCE MAYBE A COUPLE OF DELAYS IN THE POSTAL SYSTEM WILL LOOK THE SAME ON ELECTION DAY.

>> SO RIGHT NOW, IF YOU HAPPEN TO LIVE IN A JURISDICTION WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO TRY TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE SORT OF BALLOT CHANGES OR PLANNING ON IT, WHAT CAN YOU EXPECT AS A VOTER?

>> SO AS A VOTER, HOPEFULLY YOU WOULD EXPECT NOTHING.

THERE WOULD BE NO CHANGE TO YOU.

MAYBE THE ABSENTEE BALLOT COMES TO YOU AND LOOKS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

MAYBE IT COMES A LITTLE BIT LATER BECAUSE THE LIST HAD TO BE CLEARED BY THE POSTAL SERVICE, OR THERE WAS SOME HICCUPS IN THAT HAPPENING.

SO IDEALLY, FOR THE VAST MAJORITY OF VOTERS YOU WOULD NOTICE NOTHING EXCEPT A MARGINAL DELAY AND WE CAN ATTRIBUTE THAT TO THE SLUGGISHNESS OF THE POSTAL SYSTEM IN THE LAST DECADE.

I THINK THE REAL CONCERNS COMES IN THE WEEKS AHEAD IF THE SYSTEM DOES GO FORWARD.

RIGHT NOW IT'S ENJOINED.

BUT IF IT DOES GO FORWARD, IT'S IMPLEMENTED.

AND IN THE POSTAL SERVICE CAN'T KEEP UP, AND IF STATES CAN'T SUBMIT THINGS THAT GET CLEARED AND IF THE POSTAL SERVICE IS NOT ABLE TO HAND OUT BALLOTS ON TIME IN A TIMELY FASHION, THAT'S WHERE THINGS GET REALLY DIFFICULT.

>> WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE SUPREME COURT GETS INVOLVED AGAIN, CONSIDERING HOW URGENT THE MATTER IS, HOW THERE ARE DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS AND KIND OF DIFFERENT STATES OF PLAY HERE, AND WE HAVE AN ELECTION JUST EIGHT WEEKS LESS AWAY.

>> YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY, THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO HAVE TO WEIGH THEM.

BECAUSE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IS THERE IS THIS INTENSE LITIGATION.

IT'S ON APPEAL RIGHT NOW IN FRONT OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT.

THERE IS ANOTHER CASE IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND THAT MIGHT GO UP TO THE APPELLATE COURT IN D. C. AS WELL.

AND WHICHEVER PARTY LOSES IS GUARANTEED TO GO TO THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AND ASK THEM TO INTERVENE.

AND WHATEVER THE SUPREME COURT DOES, WHETHER IT REFUSES TO INTERVENE OR DOES INTERVENE INVOLVES THE COURT.

EVEN INACTION IS A FORM OF ACTION.

EACH SILENCE IS A FORM OF GETTING INVOLVED IN THIS DISPUTE.

IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE POSITION WE FIND OURSELVES ON THE EVE OF THE ELECTION THAT THIS LITIGATION, WHICH IS GETTING PUSHED SO LATE IN THE DAY FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS OUTSIDE OF THE SUPREME COURT'S CONTROL, WILL NOW BE PUT ON THE SUPREME COURT'S DOORSTEP THE EVE OF THE ELECTION.

>> PROFESSOR OF LAW AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME DEREK MULLER, THIS SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.