Posted on 07/28/2026 3:47:30 PM PDT by CFW
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals handed the Trump administration a bit of another win on Tuesday, unanimously affirming D.C. District Judge Carl Nichols' denial of a preliminary injunction in a case regarding President Trump's March executive order on election integrity
I don't mean to undersell it, but I'm calling it "a bit of" a win because it's procedural — one that does not hold that the EO is lawful (or unlawful). Instead, the appellate court agreed with the district court's determination that the plaintiffs in these consolidated cases (Democrat Party organizations and leaders) were premature with their suit — they hadn't actually sustained any concrete injuries, so they didn't have proper standing (at that point in time), and the case wasn't ripe for adjudication.
[snip]
But this is important to bear in mind: the court noted that "If the defendant agencies take steps to implement the Executive Order in a manner that violates federal law or the Constitution, Plaintiffs can promptly seek relief, which the district court and this court can decide in as expeditious a manner as circumstances require."
In other words, even though the court finds that this particular challenge is premature, that doesn't preclude it from being brought at a later date if either agency implements the EO in an unlawful manner (which, let's be honest, the plaintiffs will assert down the road regardless).
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
You can read the court’s decision here:
What is all the “for now” booschidt we keep hearing from the jackasses in the black robes. Can’t the dumb SOBs make up their minds like they did for criminal “birthrights” for “unaccompanied” anchor bambinos and making them fraudulent U.S. Citizens.
A little from the opinion:
“Plaintiffs first assert that Section 2(a) injures their members’ privacy interests. See
Opening Br. 16–22. But any such injury will follow if and only if DHS makes the decision to
compile the State Citizenship Lists in a manner that intrudes on the asserted privacy interests, not
upon the issuance of Section 2(a) of the Executive Order itself. As the matter stood when the
district court ruled, DHS had neither determined it would create those lists nor developed the
infrastructure to do so.
snip]
Third, these Plaintiffs are not directly regulated by the Order, which functions as a directive
to federal agencies. Nor are they the States charged with administering elections and adapting
their procedures to the requirements contemplated by the Order. Nor do they assert injuries as electoral candidates whose individual campaigns currently are being adversely affected by the ordered instability and uncertainty of the field on which they are competing.
Plaintiffs argue instead that their organizations will be harmed by expending resources to counter not the Executive Order, but the ensuing agency actions that Order contemplates. So the record does not establish
that the Order “itself” is inflicting “concrete harm” on these Plaintiffs before the agencies act.”
The Dems are playing clumsy chess against Trump in these cases.
They are throwing up spasm challenges without reasoning or forethought. They get a bit of help from the progressive mini judges, but then the appellate courts spank them down on mature constitutional grounds. As a result, Trump has precedent.
Im guessing something will occur much closer to the election and then the court will reject it. Timing, not much time to respond.
They sure don’t have much time for free and fair elections, do they?
“I’m guessing something will occur much closer to the election and then the court will reject it. Timing, not much time to respond.”
Yes. I suspect you are right.
In other news...
BREAKING: Jay Clayton has just been CONFIRMED as President Trump’s Director of National Intelligence by the US Senate, 51-47
He’ll be replacing BILL PULTE who just fired nearly 30% of the DNI office’s workforce.
The way it looks to me is he’s willing to block it later.
NYC and NY elections boards turned in fake names and fake addresses as voters.
CNN Dear Abby, it’s more than software glitches
That was my take. Unconstitutional violations will be alleged in a few weeks and Dems already have the friendly judge on speed dial.
DC Circuit? Wow! Take the small victories one at a time.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.