美国最高法院阻止邮寄选票计划，特朗普强烈批评法院

M THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ELECTION ADMINISTRATORS. GOOD TO SPEAK WITH YOU. IN THE BRIEF RULING, A MAJORITY OF JUSTICES BLOCKED THE MAIL BALLOT PLAN FROM MOVING FORWARD, AND ONLY TWO JUSTICES, SAMUEL ALITO AND CLARENCE THOMAS, SIDED WITH THE PRESIDENT. JOINING ME NOW TO DISCUSS THE DECISION IS AMY HOWE, NEWS HOUR SUPREME COURT ANALYST AND CO-FOUNDER OF SCOTUSBLOG. GOOD TO SEE YOU. SO IT IS A BRIEF, UNSIGNED ORDER.

WHAT DO WE KNOW ABOUT HOW THE JUSTICES RULED HERE? AMY: NOT MUCH IS THE ANSWER. IT IS ONE OF THE WEIRD QUIRKS OF THE EMERGENCY DOCKET THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A MAJORITY OPINION OR ORDER, THE JUSTICES WHO JOINED THAT ORDER DON'T SIGN THEIR NAMES AND THEY DON'T NECESSARILY INDICATE IF THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THAT, SO YOU CAN HAVE JUSTICES WHO PUBLICLY NOTE DISSENT AS JUSTICES ALITO AND THOMAS DID LAST NIGHT, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO.

IT COULD BE 7-2 BUT IT COULD BE ONE OR MORE OF THE OTHER JUSTICES WHO DID NOT AGREE DID NOT SAY SO. AMNA: WE SAW JUSTICE BRETT KAVANAUGH WRITE A CONCURRING OPINION SAYING THE POSTAL SERVICE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO THIS BUT IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE ELECTION SO THEY CANNOT DO IT NOW. DOES THAT LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN FOR THE ADMINISTRATION TO TRY AGAIN WITH MORE LEAD TIME? AMY: IT PROBABLY DOES LEAD IT OPEN AT LEAST A CRACK BECAUSE YOU HAVE JUSTICE KAVANAUGH THERE'S A FAIR CHANCE THEY COULD WIN ON APPEAL AND THEN YOU HAVE JUSTICE ALITO AND THOMAS STAYING IN THE DISSENT THAT THE POSTAL SERVICE HAS BROAD AUTHORITY TO ISSUE RULES LIKE THESE AND THE CHALLENGES PROBABLY ARE NOT GOING TO WIN ON APPEAL.

THAT'S THREE BUT YOU NEED TO MORE. WHEN THERE IS AN UNCERTAINTY ABOUT HOW THE JUSTICES VOTED AND GIVEN THE PRESIDENT'S STRONG FEELINGS ABOUT THE ISSUE, YOU LIKELY ARE GOING TO SEE THE ADMINISTRATION KEEP PUSHING FORWARD. AMNA: WE SAW THOSE STRONG FEELINGS ON DISPLAY AND WE HAVE SEEN THE PRESIDENT HAS A HISTORY OF LASHING OUT WHEN THE SUPREME COURT RULES AGAINST HIM. HE POSTED MULTIPLE TIMES BERATING THE JUSTICES INCLUDING THIS POST IN WHICH HE WROTE THAT THE SUPREME COURT IS BULLIED AND CAJOLED BY THE RADICAL LEFT.

"THESE ARE NOT THE PEOPLE INTERVIEWED TO SERVE ON THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, THEY ARE MERELY A SHELL OF THEIR ORIGINAL SELVES." IT'S WORTH POINTING OUT THE COURT HAS SIDED WITH THE PRESIDENT ON SOME ISSUES LIKE IMMIGRATION AND THE FIRING OF AGENCY OFFICIALS AND RULED AGAINST HIM ON SOME OTHERS LIKE BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP. WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF HIS REACTION TO THIS RULING? AMY: THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ISSUES LIKE BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP AND TARIFFS WHERE HE LASHED OUT BECAUSE THESE ARE ISSUES THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO HIM.

HE IS LONG BELIEVED WITHOUT ANY REAL EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS RAMPANT FRAUD IN MAIL-IN VOTING. HE'S LONG BEEN A PROPONENT OF TARIFFS AND FELT STRONGLY ABOUT BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP. HE'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL BEFORE THIS SUPREME COURT ON ISSUES LIKE IMMIGRATION AND THE EMERGENCY DOCKET HE HAD A STRING IN 2020 FIVE OF SOMETHING LIKE TWO DOZEN RULINGS IN A ROW IN FAVOR OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. BUT THESE