Government

Home Government

Trump Sends Powerful Message By Refusing To Sign Housing Bill

President Donald Trump holds a press conference with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on Friday, June 27, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

President Donald Trump is making a political statement without stopping one of Congress’ biggest bipartisan victories.

Rather than signing the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, Trump is allowing the sweeping housing package to become law automatically, using the moment to protest the Senate’s refusal to advance his preferred voter ID legislation.

“I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT,” Trump wrote on social media.

Housing bill takes effect anyway

Trump’s decision doesn’t derail the legislation. Under the Constitution, a bill becomes law if a president neither signs nor vetoes it within 10 days, excluding Sundays, while Congress remains in session.

The bipartisan package is considered one of the most significant housing reforms in decades. Among other provisions, it seeks to increase home construction, speed up environmental reviews, expand financing opportunities, encourage manufactured and modular housing, and curb certain institutional purchases of single-family homes.

Lawmakers approved the measure by overwhelming margins — 85-5 in the Senate and 358-32 in the House — giving it more than enough support to survive a veto.

Election integrity remains Trump’s priority

Trump has made clear that his focus remains on the SAVE America Act, which would establish nationwide voter ID and proof-of-citizenship requirements for federal elections.

Although the House approved the bill, it has stalled in the Senate, where Republicans do not have enough votes to break a filibuster.

The president previously canceled a White House signing ceremony for the housing legislation, calling it a “big yawn” compared with the push for election integrity.

A message to Congress

Behind the scenes, Trump’s move reportedly caught Republicans off guard. Many had hoped to showcase the housing bill as a marquee accomplishment before the 2026 midterm elections, only to see it overshadowed by the president’s renewed push for voter ID legislation.

Instead, Trump chose a different strategy. By letting the bill become law without his signature, he avoided a veto fight while keeping public attention on his demand that Congress move forward with nationwide voter ID legislation.

The episode underscores Trump’s determination to keep election reform at the forefront of the national debate as Republicans head into the final stretch of the 2026 midterm campaign.

READ NEXT: Netanyahu Reveals One Big Succession Secret — And Keeps Another

Grassley Joins Democrats Seeking Answers On FBI Director Kash Patel’s Spending, Travel

The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

WASHINGTON — Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is pressing FBI Director Kash Patel for answers about his spending, travel, and use of government resources, giving Democrats an influential Republican ally as lawmakers intensify oversight of the bureau’s finances.

In a letter to Patel, Grassley (R-Iowa) requested records related to the FBI director’s travel, security costs, and vehicle purchases, saying Congress has a duty to ensure taxpayer dollars are being spent appropriately.

Grassley Demands Travel Records

Among his requests, Grassley asked Patel to account for any personal use of FBI aircraft.

“For each trip where you used an FBI aircraft for personal travel, have you reimbursed the FBI as required by law? If yes, please provide the records,” Grassley wrote.

The senator also called for an “independent and objective review” of Patel’s travel practices and questioned procurement decisions made under his leadership.

Grassley specifically asked the bureau to explain why it “decided to purchase BMW vehicles instead of Chevy Suburbans,” signaling that his inquiry extends beyond travel expenses to broader spending decisions.

Democrats Raise Similar Concerns

Grassley’s letter follows similar requests from Senate Democrats, who have questioned Patel’s travel, security expenditures, and use of government resources.

As Mediate reports:

Patel’s personal jet travel as the head of the FBI has also raised concern with critics. Officials have said Patel reimburses travel that is personal, which equates to what he would fork over typically for commercial travel.

Democratic lawmakers specifically noted a “VIP snorkel” trip Patel reportedly took. According to a report based on government emails purportedly obtained by the Associated Press, Patel took an “exclusive excursion” around the sunken USS Arizona battleship, a Pearl Harbor memorial during a trip to Hawaii.

“Your VIP snorkeling experience in Hawaii was not an isolated incident,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) wrote in a letter. “You frequently demand special perks on ‘official’ trips around the globe, such as a taxpayer-funded helicopter tour during your multi-country jaunt across East Asia and other recreational activities like jet skiing.”

The lawmakers cited a source who told them Patel told field office personnel in a meeting, “If you have golf, hockey, fishing, or hunting and beautiful sights, you’re going to see a lot of me.”

Democratic lawmakers have sought records detailing official travel costs, transportation expenses, and whether taxpayer-funded assets have been used exclusively for government business.

While they have not accused Patel of criminal wrongdoing, they argue Congress has a responsibility to review the bureau’s spending.

FBI Yet To Respond Publicly

The FBI has not publicly responded to Grassley’s latest requests.

Agency officials have previously maintained that travel by the FBI director is driven by operational and security requirements and that associated costs are consistent with those incurred by previous directors.

It remains unclear when the bureau will provide the documents requested by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Bipartisan Oversight

Grassley’s involvement gives the issue added significance because he has long been one of Congress’ most outspoken Republican advocates for oversight of the FBI and Justice Department.

Throughout his Senate career, Grassley has frequently scrutinized administrations from both parties, arguing that transparency is essential to maintaining public confidence in federal law enforcement.

His latest letter suggests that questions surrounding Patel’s management of the bureau are attracting bipartisan attention.

Pressure Mounts On FBI Leadership

Whether Grassley’s inquiry will uncover any significant issues remains unclear.

But his requests add to the growing scrutiny of Patel’s leadership, as lawmakers in both parties seek a clearer accounting of how the FBI has used taxpayer resources under his tenure.

READ NEXT: Trump Wants Immediate Supreme Court Do-Over

Trump Jokes About Keeping NYSE Bell For White House Ballroom

1
President Donald J. Trump hosts a Rose Garden Club dinner in honor of Police Week in the White House Rose Garden, Monday, May 11, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump joked Monday that he planned to keep the New York Stock Exchange’s ceremonial opening bell for display in his new White House ballroom, prompting criticism from opponents and renewed attention to the administration’s ongoing renovation projects.

Trump became the first president to ring the NYSE opening bell remotely from the Oval Office during an event marking the launch of the administration’s new “Trump Accounts” investment program for eligible children.

After ringing the bell, Trump quipped, “I’m not giving it back,” before later repeating the remark during a White House luncheon.

‘They’ll Have To Fight Like Hell’

Speaking to guests in the Rose Garden, Trump again pointed to the bell and joked about making it part of the White House.

“There’s the bell right there. It’s so beautiful, I’m not giving it back. I don’t know if it’s supposed to go back, but they’re gonna have to fight like hell to get it back,” Trump said.

It was not immediately clear whether the president was speaking entirely in jest, and there has been no indication that the NYSE bell will remain at the White House.

Latest In Series Of Similar Jokes

The remark follows several similar episodes in recent months.

Last month, Olympic speed skating champion Jordan Stolz placed one of his gold medals around Trump’s neck during an event in Wisconsin. Trump joked that he was “keeping it” before returning the medal.

He made a similar quip after FIFA President Gianni Infantino brought the FIFA World Cup trophy to the White House ahead of next year’s tournament, later saying FIFA had permitted the trophy to remain on display.

Ballroom Project Draws Renewed Attention

Trump’s latest comments also focused attention on the White House ballroom project, one of the administration’s most ambitious renovation efforts.

The ballroom, originally projected to cost about $200 million, has since grown substantially in scope. Recent reports indicate estimated costs have risen to roughly $600 million, though the administration disputes claims that taxpayers will bear a significant portion of the expense.

The White House has said the ballroom will provide a secure venue for large state functions and official events.

Critics Question Costs

Democrats and preservation groups have continued criticizing the project, arguing the administration understated its expected cost and failed to adequately explain how construction will ultimately be financed.

The White House has maintained that private donors are funding much of the project and has defended the renovation as a long-overdue modernization of the executive mansion.

Whether Trump’s comments about the NYSE bell were serious or simply another off-the-cuff joke, they quickly became the latest flashpoint in the broader debate surrounding the president’s efforts to reshape the White House during his second term.

READ NEXT: Former Democrat Star Arrested On Drug Charges

Sen. Mike Lee Says Most Republicans Don’t Know McConnell’s Condition

Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

WASHINGTON — Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) says most Republican senators have little or no firsthand knowledge of Sen. Mitch McConnell’s medical condition, underscoring the uncertainty surrounding the Kentucky Republican as he remains hospitalized weeks after a serious medical emergency.

Lee made the remarks when asked about McConnell’s prolonged absence from the Senate, saying rank-and-file lawmakers have received few details beyond the limited public statements released by McConnell’s office.

‘Most Of Us Don’t Know’

Lee acknowledged that speculation has grown because so little official information has been released.

His comments contrast with earlier remarks from Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who previously said McConnell “sounded good” during a recent conversation. Lee indicated that most senators have not received similar updates and remain largely in the dark about their colleague’s condition.

Office Continues To Release Limited Information

McConnell’s office has consistently maintained that the 84-year-old senator is recovering and remains engaged with Senate business.

In its latest public statement, spokesman David Popp said McConnell “continues to improve” and is working with staff on Kentucky and Senate matters while Congress is in recess. The office has not disclosed his diagnosis, prognosis, or expected discharge date.

Medical Emergency Prompted Questions

McConnell has not appeared publicly since June 14, when emergency responders were dispatched to his Washington residence.

Emergency dispatch audio reviewed by multiple news organizations described an unconscious patient and referenced CPR in progress. McConnell’s office has not confirmed the specific medical event that led to his hospitalization.

The absence of detailed updates has fueled intense online speculation, including unverified claims promoted by White House confidant Laura Loomer. McConnell’s office has offered no support for those assertions, saying only that the senator continues to improve.

Questions Persist As Senate Recess Continues

The Senate remains in recess until later this month, giving McConnell additional time to recover before lawmakers return to Washington.

Whether he will be able to resume his duties when the Senate reconvenes remains unclear. McConnell previously announced he will not seek reelection and plans to retire when his current term expires in January 2027.

For now, Lee’s comments highlight what many senators have acknowledged privately: beyond the brief statements released by McConnell’s aides, even many of his Republican colleagues say they know little about his current condition.

READ NEXT: McConnell’s Neighbor Breaks The Silence

Johnson Reveals His Next Move On The SAVE America Act

Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Mike Johnson says Republicans are preparing another attempt to send the SAVE America Act to President Donald Trump’s desk, this time by packaging the election integrity legislation into a future budget reconciliation bill that could bypass the Senate filibuster.

Johnson made the remarks during an appearance on “Fox News Sunday,” telling Shannon Bream that the bill remains one of the White House’s top priorities and pledging that the House will take it up again after passing it three previous times.

Johnson Eyes Reconciliation Strategy

“We’re going to try one more time on a budget reconciliation bill,” Johnson said. “I think that will be the way to get it through the Senate, and finally, to the president’s desk.”

WATCH:

The SAVE America Act would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote and a government-issued photo ID to cast a ballot in federal elections. The House approved the measure in February, but it has repeatedly stalled in the Senate, where Republicans lack the 60 votes needed to overcome a Democratic filibuster.

Johnson acknowledged that reality, saying there is “zero chance” seven Senate Democrats would support the bill under the chamber’s normal rules.

Trump Continues To Push Election Bill

Johnson said President Trump considers the legislation a top priority and has encouraged congressional Republicans to continue pursuing it.

The speaker said Republicans are developing another reconciliation package that would combine election integrity measures with budget-related provisions in hopes of qualifying for the Senate’s reconciliation process, which requires only a simple majority for passage.

Johnson has previously suggested tying election integrity provisions to a federal grant program for states, arguing that such a structure could satisfy reconciliation rules while encouraging states to adopt stricter voting standards.

House Conservatives Press Leadership

The issue has exposed divisions within the House Republican conference in recent weeks.

A group of conservative Republicans temporarily blocked House business after demanding the SAVE America Act be attached to must-pass legislation, including the annual National Defense Authorization Act. Johnson ultimately agreed to merge the election bill with the defense package before sending it to the Senate, though he acknowledged the Senate could later remove the provision.

Johnson defended his handling of the dispute, saying House Republicans remain united behind the goal of enacting the legislation despite disagreements over strategy.

Senate Outlook Remains Uncertain

Whether the proposal can ultimately pass through reconciliation remains an open question.

Senate Republicans have expressed differing views on pursuing another reconciliation package, and reconciliation rules generally limit legislation to provisions directly affecting federal spending, revenues, or the debt.

Still, Johnson said he is confident House Republicans can assemble a package that Senate Republicans will support.

“We’re planning to send over a bill that will be irresistible for any Republican,” he said, arguing it would promote affordability, reduce government waste and strengthen election integrity.

READ NEXT: Watch: Congresswoman’s July Fourth Message Leaves Millions Fuming

Insiders Say Trump Has Finally Settled On His 2028 Favorite

4
President Donald Trump signs Executive Orders, Thursday, April 17, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is increasingly signaling that Vice President JD Vance is his preferred heir to the MAGA movement, according to multiple White House insiders, though the president has stopped short of offering a formal endorsement for the 2028 Republican nomination.

The reports suggest Trump has moved away from privately weighing Vance against Secretary of State Marco Rubio and now speaks more confidently about the vice president’s political future.

White House Sources Point To Vance

According to Axios, White House aides say Trump has begun making comments such as “JD looks great” and no longer frames the question as a choice between Vance and Rubio. One administration source told Axios that “JD is earning it, and Trump sees it.”

The turning point for Vance reportedly came in mid-June when he joined presidential envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff in helping negotiate the memorandum of understanding with Iran, a key step toward ending the conflict.

The diplomatic breakthrough coincided with the June 16 release of Vance’s book, “Communion: Finding My Way Back to Faith.” Already scheduled for a promotional tour, Vance received additional national exposure because of his prominent role in the negotiations.

Vance conducted 33 interviews during June, appearing on conservative podcasts, at White House press briefings, in informal media gaggles, and on programs across the political spectrum, including HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher” and ABC’s “The View.”

One Trump adviser told Axios that although the president does not watch “The View,” he saw clips from Vance’s appearance and was pleased with what he saw.

Trump Hasn’t Made It Official

Despite the reports, Trump has not publicly endorsed Vance as his successor.

Over the past year, the president has repeatedly praised both Vance and Rubio while emphasizing that the next presidential election remains years away. He has previously suggested that the vice president would naturally have an advantage but has also described Rubio as a strong potential leader.

Political observers note that withholding a formal endorsement allows Trump to maintain influence within the Republican Party while avoiding an early succession battle.

Rubio Remains An Influential Figure

Rubio continues to be viewed as one of the administration’s most influential officials, but allies say he has shown little interest in challenging Vance for the Republican nomination.

The secretary of state has publicly praised Vance and has previously indicated he would support the vice president if he decides to seek the White House in 2028.

2028 Race Already Taking Shape

Although the Republican presidential primary is still more than two years away, speculation about Trump’s eventual successor has intensified as potential candidates build fundraising networks and expand their national profiles.

For now, Trump has not formally anointed a successor. But according to White House insiders, the president increasingly appears to view Vance as the leading contender to carry the MAGA banner after he leaves office.

READ NEXT: Stephen A. Smith Predicts Democrats’ New Direction Could Cost Them Everything

Former CIA Director Sues Trump Administration as Criminal Probes Intensify

3
By The White House - https://www.flickr.com/photos/202101414@N05/54581054338/, Public Domain,

Former CIA Director John Brennan is taking the Trump administration to court as two Justice Department criminal investigations into his conduct continue to gather steam.

In a lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court in Washington, D.C., Brennan asked a judge to order the Justice Department, the White House, the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence to preserve records related to the ongoing probes, arguing the materials could prove critical if he is eventually charged.

The filing does not seek to stop the investigations. Instead, Brennan’s attorneys contend that internal emails, memos and other communications may become key evidence if they later argue any prosecution was motivated by politics rather than the facts.

“The evidence of vindictiveness in this matter is overwhelming,” Brennan’s lawyers wrote in the 46-page complaint.

The lawsuit accuses the Trump administration of using the criminal justice system to target political opponents, claiming Brennan has been “vindictively singled out for investigation and prosecution.”

Brennan, who led the CIA under former President Barack Obama, has spent years publicly criticizing President Donald Trump. The two have been locked in a bitter feud dating back to Trump’s first term, when Brennan sharply criticized Trump’s handling of intelligence matters and Trump responded by revoking Brennan’s security clearance in 2018, calling his conduct “erratic” and accusing him of making “wild outbursts” about the administration. Brennan later became one of Trump’s most outspoken intelligence-community critics on television and in public appearances.

Now, that long-running political rivalry has become intertwined with a pair of Justice Department investigations.

One investigation is examining whether Brennan made false statements to Congress during 2023 testimony regarding the intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

The second is a broader probe examining allegations that Obama- and Biden-era intelligence and law enforcement officials participated in a years-long effort to undermine Trump’s political career. No charges have been filed against Brennan in either investigation.

According to the lawsuit, Brennan intends to challenge any future indictment as “unconstitutionally vindictive and selective.” His attorneys argue that preserving government records now is essential because losing those materials could make it impossible to determine whether prosecutors acted appropriately.

The case has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb.

Among those named as defendants are President Trump, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel, U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones and other officials involved in the investigations.

CBS News has reported that some current and former Justice Department officials have raised concerns about personnel changes within the Brennan investigations after career prosecutors were replaced by lawyers viewed as more closely aligned with the administration. CBS reported that attorney Joseph DiGenova was brought in to oversee one of the investigations, while constitutional scholar John Yoo and former Trump election security official Kurt Olsen have also joined the effort in advisory roles.

The Justice Department declined to discuss the existence of any investigation but pushed back on Brennan’s allegations.

“While we cannot comment on the existence, or lack thereof, of an investigation, it is certainly rich that John Brennan is accusing anyone of a ‘retribution campaign,'” a DOJ spokesperson said.

Brennan’s attorneys also point to more than 100 public statements Trump has made about the former CIA director since 2017, arguing those remarks could become relevant if criminal charges are ultimately filed.

For now, Brennan has not been charged with any crime. His lawsuit seeks only to preserve records that could become evidence if the investigations eventually lead to a prosecution.

Supreme Court Issues Ruling On Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order

2
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The Supreme Court on Tuesday dealt President Donald Trump one of the biggest legal defeats of his second term, ruling that his executive order restricting birthright citizenship violates the Constitution’s 14th Amendment and cannot take effect.

In a 5-4 decision, Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson in holding that the Constitution guarantees automatic U.S. citizenship to nearly everyone born on American soil, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. Justice Brett Kavanaugh dissented on the constitutional question but agreed the order could not be enforced under current federal law.

The ruling effectively ends Trump’s effort to reinterpret the Citizenship Clause through executive action, preserving a constitutional principle that has been recognized for more than a century.

Court Reaffirms 14th Amendment

Writing for the majority, Roberts concluded that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause protects nearly all children born in the United States.

The Court relied heavily on longstanding constitutional precedent, including the landmark 1898 decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark, which has long been understood to guarantee birthright citizenship except in narrow circumstances, such as children born to foreign diplomats or hostile occupying forces.

Trump’s executive order, signed on his first day back in office, sought to deny automatic citizenship to children born in the United States unless at least one parent was either a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

The administration argued that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States excludes children born to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. Most constitutional scholars, lower courts and ultimately the Supreme Court rejected that interpretation.

A Signature Trump Policy Falls

Birthright citizenship became one of the defining legal battles of Trump’s second-term immigration agenda.

The president made the policy a centerpiece of his Day One executive actions, arguing that ending what he called “birth tourism” and removing incentives for illegal immigration would strengthen border security.

The order never took effect after federal judges across the country blocked it, finding it likely violated the Constitution. The Supreme Court previously addressed procedural questions surrounding nationwide injunctions in the litigation but postponed deciding the constitutional merits until this term.

Trump even attended oral arguments at the Supreme Court in April—an unprecedented move for a sitting president—and later acknowledged publicly that he expected the administration faced an uphill battle before the justices. (RELATED: Trump Makes Unprecedented Move and Attends SCOTUS Hearing On Birthright Citizenship)

White House Defended Order

Throughout the litigation, the Trump administration maintained that the executive order was constitutional.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt repeatedly argued that birthright citizenship, as currently interpreted, conflicts with the original meaning of the 14th Amendment and said the administration intended to defend the policy all the way to the Supreme Court.

Senior White House adviser Stephen Miller, one of the administration’s chief architects of its immigration agenda, also argued before the decision that the Constitution does not require automatic citizenship for children born to illegal immigrants or temporary visitors.

As of Tuesday afternoon, the White House had not yet released a detailed official response to the ruling.

Major Constitutional Defeat

The decision represents one of the most significant judicial setbacks of Trump’s second presidency.

While the administration has secured victories before the Court on several executive power disputes, Tuesday’s ruling preserves one of the nation’s oldest constitutional guarantees and leaves any change to birthright citizenship largely in the hands of Congress or a future constitutional amendment rather than presidential action.

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

Trump Unloads After Supreme Court Lets Carroll Verdict Stand

0
Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

President Donald Trump blasted the Supreme Court after the justices refused to hear his appeal of the $5 million civil judgment in the E. Jean Carroll case, calling it another example of “weaponization” and vowing to keep fighting in court.

The high court declined without comment to review Trump’s challenge to the 2023 jury verdict, leaving intact the ruling that found him liable for sexually abusing and defaming longtime advice columnist E. Jean Carroll. The justices did not note any dissents.

Trump wasted little time responding.

“Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to ‘review’ a Fake Case brought against me by a woman I never met (Decades old celebrity photo line, standing with her husband, does not count!),” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“I will continue the fight against this Weaponization and Lawfare Case against me, including the ridiculous claim of Defamation, with all of my power and strength.”

The president argued the lawsuit was politically motivated, saying, “This Case is really against the United States of America, and all it stands for, and should never be allowed to happen to another President, or Candidate to be!”

Trump also renewed his criticism of New York’s Adult Survivors Act, the temporary law that opened a one-year window for decades-old sexual assault claims. He claimed the law was “tailormade” to target him and called the outcome an “Injustice.”

Monday’s decision effectively closes the door on Trump’s effort to overturn the original $5 million verdict, which stemmed from a civil trial in Manhattan in 2023. During that trial, jurors concluded Trump was liable for sexually abusing Carroll in the mid-1990s and for defaming her after she publicly accused him. Trump has consistently denied the allegations and has maintained that he never met Carroll.

The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case marks another legal setback for the president in his years-long battle with Carroll, but it is not the end of the broader litigation.

A separate case, in which a federal jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million after finding Trump repeatedly defamed her through public statements, remains on a separate appellate track. Trump’s legal team continues to challenge that judgment, arguing it should be overturned on multiple grounds.

Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, celebrated the ruling, saying the Supreme Court’s action “affirms once and for all” the jury’s verdict and Trump’s liability in the case.

For Trump, however, Monday’s order appears to have only intensified his determination.

“I will continue the fight,” the president wrote, signaling that his legal battle with Carroll is far from over—even as one of the highest-profile cases against him has now reached its end.

Supreme Court Deals Blow To Trump, GOP In Major Mail Ballot Ruling

3
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee a significant setback Monday, ruling 5-4 that states may continue counting mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day as long as they were postmarked by Election Day.

The decision preserves election laws in more than a dozen states that provide a short grace period for mailed ballots to reach election officials, rejecting Republican arguments that federal law requires all ballots to be received before polls close on Election Day.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett authored the majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s three liberal justices.

“The election-day statutes say nothing about ballot receipt, and we cannot add to the words Congress chose,” Barrett wrote.

The court’s four remaining conservative justices dissented.

The case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, centered on a Mississippi law allowing absentee ballots postmarked by Election Day to be counted if they arrive within five business days. Republicans argued that the practice violated federal statutes establishing a uniform national Election Day for federal races.

The ruling leaves intact similar laws in 14 states, including both Republican- and Democrat-led states, as well as comparable provisions for military and overseas voters in many other states. More than 750,000 ballots nationwide were counted under such grace-period laws during the 2024 election, according to court filings and reporting on the case.

The decision represents a legal defeat for Trump, who has spent years criticizing mail voting and has repeatedly argued that elections should be decided on Election Day.

Trump’s Justice Department backed the Republican National Committee’s challenge before the Supreme Court, continuing the administration’s broader effort to tighten election rules ahead of the 2026 midterms.

The ruling also exposed divisions within the Republican Party.

Mississippi Secretary of State Michael Watson, a Republican, defended his state’s law throughout the litigation, arguing that ballots cast by Election Day should still count if postal delays prevent them from arriving immediately.

Mississippi’s position received support from organizations including the Democratic National Committee, the NAACP and the League of Women Voters, while the RNC was backed by House Republicans’ campaign arm, Citizens United and several Republican-led states.

The legal battle began after the Republican National Committee and the Libertarian Party of Mississippi challenged the state’s absentee ballot law. A federal district court upheld Mississippi’s policy before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Republicans, prompting Watson to appeal to the Supreme Court. Monday’s ruling reverses that appeals court decision.

The decision arrives as Trump continues pushing for stricter election rules nationwide.

In March, the president signed an executive order aimed at restricting mail voting and requiring additional proof of citizenship for federal elections. That order remains tied up in ongoing litigation in lower courts.

This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.