Trump Slams Supreme Court After It Blocks Mail-In Voting Restrictions

President Donald Trump launched a missive against the Supreme Court on Tuesday after it blocked his Administration’s plan to implement changes to mail-in voting ahead of the November midterms.

In a lengthy post on his social media platform Truth Social, the President took aim at unnamed “Certain Justices” whom he claimed were “petrified of these crazed and depraved Democrats,” adding: “These are not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court, they are merely a shell of their original selves.”

Trump appointed three Justices to the court—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—during his first term. With the court handing Trump a handful of legal victories since, his second-term Administration sought an emergency allowance for restrictions on mailed ballots, arguing that such action is necessary to curb electoral fraud—the President’s past claims of widespread electoral fraud have been repeatedly debunked.

But on Monday, the Supreme Court, in a one-paragraph unsigned order, denied Trump’s bid. The court argued that Trump is likely to lose in court over its push for last-minute changes: Kavanaugh, concurring with the majority, wrote separately that, while the U.S. Postal Service may have authority to implement restrictions, applying them for the 2026 polls “would be arbitrary and capricious” as state and local election officials would lack time to implement them.

The court order has significant implications for the midterms—in which Republicans are seeking to defend their majority in Congress—as nearly 30% of voters nationwide mail in their ballots.

“The Court’s inability and unwillingness to do the right thing for our Country will go down, in a very negative way, in the annals of History,” Trump wrote. “This Supreme Court is bullied and cajoled by the Radical Left into making decisions that have set America back at least a hundred years.”

The President lauded Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, who publicly dissented from the order, calling them “legends both.”

In his dissent, Alito penned that the USPS “has broad authority to regulate the mail” and likely has the power to implement Trump’s preferred limits. He also criticized the litigant states who challenged the restrictions in court ahead of the midterms, writing: “The plaintiff states cannot claim the timing of the rule tilts the equities in their favor when they, and courts hearing their claims, are responsible for so much of the delay.”

But the Supreme Court ruling is unlikely to stop Trump from trying to limit mail voting. Later Tuesday, Attorney General Todd Blanche said that while the Administration acknowledged the court’s order and would comply, “President Trump’s efforts to make sure that we have free and fair elections are not going to stop just in November or after or thereafter.”

How Trump’s appointees have voted over the years

Trump appointed Gorsuch in 2017, Kavanaugh in 2018, and Barrett in 2020. Since then, they have largely delivered victories for him and his conservative agenda.

All three ruled that U.S. states cannot remove Trump from the 2024 election ballot and reversed a Colorado court ruling that attempted to rule him ineligible. They aligned with the court’s conservatives, ruling that former Presidents have some immunity from prosecution for official acts, as Trump faced criminal cases. They also overturned judicial precedents that protected abortion rights, in line with Trump’s repeated claims that such policies be decided at the state level—and he has taken credit for it.

Since his return to the White House last year, they’ve given the President sweeping authority over “independent” regulators. They’ve echoed his crackdown on transgender rights by upholding state laws against trans athletes’ participation in female sports. They’ve also supported his stringent immigration agenda, including allowing for third-country removals of illegal immigrants.

But they have also far from acted as a reliable bloc and have imposed some consequential limits on Trump’s power. In turn, Trump has assailed the court and its Justices. In February, Barrett and Gorsuch sided with Chief Justice John Roberts and the majority in ruling that Trump’s emergency order tariffs were illegal, while Kavanaugh dissented. At the time, Trump called the tariff ruling “deeply disappointing,” adding that he was “ashamed of certain members of the court.”

Then, in June, Barrett and Kavanaugh joined the majority in rejecting the Trump Administration’s attempt to redefine birthright citizenship through executive actions; Kavanaugh had reservations in his concurrence, while Gorsuch dissented. Trump, in apparent anticipation that the vote wouldn’t be in his favor, posted in March that “Dumb Judges and Justices will not a great Country make!”

In June, Kavanaugh joined the majority in denying Trump’s request to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Cook, whom Trump directed to be fired in August 2025, filed a lawsuit, and she remains in office while her case is pending.

On immigration, Barrett and Kavanaugh ruled with the majority in December 2025 to continue blocking the deployment of the National Guard in Chicago, after Trump attempted to do so in Illinois to protect federal officials carrying out his mass-deportation policy. Earlier that year, in April, all three voted to temporarily block the Trump Administration from deporting a group of immigrants in Northern Texas under the Alien Enemies Act, until they were served more notice.

Despite some rulings not favoring Trump, Democratic lawmakers have painted the Supreme Court as pro-Trump and have tried to push for reforms, though Chief Justice Roberts and the other associate Justices have denied such partisanship.

But Donald B. Verrilli Jr., a solicitor general during the Obama Administration, said at a briefing for reporters on Tuesday at Georgetown University Law Center: “This is not a MAGA court.” And Trump would seem to agree.

“It is a Court that will go down as having rendered some of the most destructive, hurtful, and damaging decisions in our Country’s history,” the President wrote. “It is not easy for me to write this criticism of the United States Supreme Court—it will likely cost me dearly for years to come —but I feel it my obligation and duty, as President, to do so for the America we love!”