Germany

Berlin, September 16, 2026. The US Supreme Court rejected the Trump administration's emergency request on Monday evening to immediately apply new federal rules for mail-in voting, just seven weeks before the November 3 midterm elections. According to Tagesschau, the judges estimated, in a brief statement, that it was "unlikely that the government would prevail" in challenging a lower court's injunction. The practical consequence is that states will continue to send out mail-in ballots according to current standards, as has already begun in some places, while primaries continue in all 50 states, which started on March 3 in Arkansas, North Carolina, and Texas, and ended on September 15 in Delaware - with 36 states also renewing their governors.

The FAZ takes a closer look at the political implications of the episode. The White House plan, the newspaper writes, aimed to transform the postal service into a kind of federal oversight authority over a decentralized electoral system, as intended by the Constitution, a plan described as "authoritarian" by the newspaper, which recalls that two of the nine judges expressed detailed dissent in its favor. But for the FAZ, the legal defeat costs Trump nothing: his real goal was not the security of the election, but the uncertainty it installs in public opinion. The narrative of massive mail-in voting fraud, according to the newspaper, remains unfounded in serious studies - but its political effect is already achieved among voters who now doubt the outcome of the November election.

The newspaper also notes the relief, even in states run by Republicans, where election officials will not have to urgently reorganize an already ongoing election. The Justice Department, the FAZ notes, continues to pursue lawsuits against states, a sign that the executive branch does not give up on influencing the organization of the vote despite this setback before the highest court.