Oregon — Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek delivered a forceful denunciation of President Donald Trump following Monday’s Supreme Court ruling on his election executive order, portraying the decision as a threat to Oregon’s long-standing vote-by-mail system.
The ruling, however, does not prohibit Oregon from conducting elections by mail, require the state to abandon vote-by-mail or decide that Trump has constitutional authority to regulate state elections.
“Elections have always been, and always should be, up to the states,” Kotek said.
“President Trump’s directive to the United States Postal Service is unconstitutional and an assault on our democracy and designed to silence voters,” she continued. “Oregon has been conducting elections by mail-in voting safely and securely for decades.” Kotek ended her statement in capital letters: “KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF OUR ELECTIONS!”
Her reaction was considerably broader and more definitive than the limited procedural question resolved by the Supreme Court. In a 6-3 decision issued August 24, the court temporarily stayed an injunction preventing the administration from implementing portions of Executive Order 14399 against 23 states and the District of Columbia. Oregon is among the states challenging the order.
The unsigned majority did not determine whether the executive order is constitutional. It concluded that the administration was likely to prevail on its argument that the states sued too early, before federal agencies had taken actions causing a sufficiently concrete injury.
Become a Paid Subscriber for Exclusive Content Access and Support Independent News
“The Court’s disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful,” the majority wrote. “On that score, time will tell.”
Nothing in the decision ends vote-by-mail in Oregon. Ballots will not suddenly cease being mailed because of the ruling, and Oregon voters retain the ability to vote through the state system.
Trump’s order instead directs federal agencies to develop new election-related policies. It tells the Department of Homeland Security to compile lists of residents confirmed to be U.S. citizens who will be at least 18 by an upcoming federal election. States are not required to use those lists.
The order also directs the attorney general to prioritize investigations and possible prosecutions involving ballots issued to people ineligible to vote.
Its most disputed provision instructs the U.S. Postal Service to undertake a rulemaking concerning mail-in and absentee ballots. The required proposal includes standardized ballot envelopes, unique barcodes and state-specific lists of voters participating in mail voting.
The proposed provisions could eventually affect how Oregon’s ballots move through the Postal Service. But the executive order itself is not a final Postal Service regulation, and the agency could alter or abandon parts of the proposal during the rulemaking process.
The Supreme Court said states could bring another challenge if a final regulation imposes requirements or causes a concrete injury.
Kotek’s statement fits a broader pattern in which opposition to the Trump administration has become a recurring theme of her public communications and political positioning. Her office says she has worked since Trump’s return to office to counter federal policies involving elections, health care, vaccines, immigration enforcement, federal spending and the attempted deployment of National Guard troops in Portland.
Kotek’s official record of accomplishments includes a section titled “Opposed President Trump’s Budget Cuts, Pledged to Protect Oregon.” Her office has also pledged that she will continue responding to what it calls Trump’s “attacks” on Oregon and its political values.
That persistent focus provides context for the unusually intense language in her response to Monday’s ruling. Kotek treated the decision as part of a larger conflict with the administration, even though the justices did not authorize the elimination of Oregon vote-by-mail or decide the underlying constitutional dispute.
Her assertion that elections should be left to states also simplifies the constitutional arrangement. States generally administer elections, but the Constitution gives Congress authority to alter rules governing congressional elections. The unresolved question is whether the president and executive agencies may impose the contemplated procedures without additional congressional authorization.
Oregon has conducted primary and general elections by mail since 2000. Voters approved statewide vote-by-mail in 1998, and lawmakers expanded the system to all elections in 2007, according to the Oregon Secretary of State.
State officials say Oregon’s system uses signature verification, secured drop boxes, ballot tracking and registration checks. A review cited by the Secretary of State found 38 voter-fraud convictions among approximately 61 million ballots cast between 2000 and 2019.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the Supreme Court’s decision. They argued that states were already spending money and diverting election resources in response to the order and could face disruptive changes shortly before the November midterms.
The stay will remain in effect while the First Circuit Court of Appeals considers the administration’s appeal. The legality of Trump’s directives, including any final Postal Service restrictions, remains open to future litigation.
About the Author
Discover more from Right Now Oregon
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Seems it’s conveniently ommitted that the court case between the Federal Government and State of Oregon, Dan Rayfield, Secretary of State was Ordered to remove 800,000 illegitimate voters from the Oregon voter rolls.