A federal judge on Thursday halted—at least for now—the administration’s effort to implement President Trump’s executive order limiting mail voting, stalling the directive for a second time with the first mail ballots due to go out in roughly a week. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama nominee sitting in Boston, blocked the government from carrying the order into effect for two weeks, citing the practical impossibility of forcing states to redesign envelopes, rebuild voter lists, retrain officials, and retool election systems before the midterms. The ruling arrives days after the Supreme Court issued a procedural decision that had cleared the way for the administration to proceed, turning what should have been a straightforward question of election integrity into another round of last-minute judicial improvisation.

The executive order sought a modest and long-overdue correction: that the Postal Service deliver mail ballots only to voters whose eligibility can be confirmed and that envelopes meet uniform, verifiable standards. Talwani treated those requirements as an unconstitutional federal intrusion, even as she conceded that states lack the time and money to comply—an argument that converts administrative inconvenience into a constitutional shield. The Constitution assigns the states the mechanics of elections, but it does not require the federal government to serve as an uncritical courier for ballots whose chain of custody no one can audit. When a district judge can freeze an elected president’s attempt to impose basic order on a process that has already strained public confidence, the courts cease to be referees and become participants.

The case will almost certainly return to the Supreme Court, and soon. At some point the Chief Justice is going to have to discipline the federal judges that are being used as tools of the established order to thwart the will of the people and make a mockery of the democratic process. A republic cannot function if every attempt to restore integrity in the counting of votes is met with a two-week injunction timed to the calendar of the next election. The people elected a president to secure the franchise, not to watch a single district court in Massachusetts decide, on the eve of balloting, that security itself is the greater threat.

Additional ADNN Articles: 

Supreme Court Clears Way for Trump's Mail Ballot Fraud Protections
John Solomon: Our Intelligence Agencies Pose Greatest Threat to Elections
Trump Signs Orders Limiting Birthright Citizenship After Court Setback
Midnight USB Failure Leaves Kornacki Silent as Crowley Edges Hong