462
Trump Vow to 'Get Rid of Mail-In Ballots' for 2026 Blasted as 'Unconstitutional'
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2025
462 points (98.9% liked)
politics
25279 readers
2671 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If the Save act goes through I don't see how they couldn't do similar with this. I imagine the argument would be the same, that they are not taking the administration of the voting away from the states, just setting a standardized required method. I don't think he'd be able to do it via executive order legally, but I dont know who would stop it. He could just have the house/Senate pass it like the save act if they so wanted. Your state constitution doesn't matter at that point. We like to say it's a free country but it took us 4 amendments just to get to a point that still basically says our people don't have the right to vote.
The constitution didn't have a right to vote.
The bill of rights didn't have a right to vote.
The 15th amendment (1870) said we can't restrict voting based off Race.
The 19th amendment (1920) said we can't restrict voting for women.
The 24th Amendment (1964) said we can't restrict the voting by taxing polls.
The 26th Amendment (1971) said we can't restrict voters over 18 (previously 21).
Most people think this means all those people have a right to vote, but it is really the government doesn't have the ability to explicitly restrict those people from voting.
If U.S. citizens had the right to vote none of those amendments would have been necessary and we would be free to vote and our arguments would hold up in court easier. But the U.S. has long perpetuated the lie that we are free. We are a "democratic Republic" where the government can, has, and will try to restrict our freedom at every turn if it benefits those in power.
Tldr; If U.S. citizens had a right to vote, we wouldn't have had amendments, the Supreme Court would have ruled a long time ago that any act restricting U.S. citizens from voting was illegal.
The ‘if’ in ‘if the SAVE Act goes through’ is doing a lot of work. The recent bill that was passed was only able to be done through budget reconciliation, because you only need 50 votes plus the VP to break the tie. But for bills outside of budget reconciliation, you need 60 votes to end the filibuster. Barring anything unforeseen (recognizing that breaking norms is the norm for this administration), there’s no way I could see it getting through the Senate.