News

U.S. Political News Today: Supreme Court Rejects Trump Mail-Ballot Restrictions

WASHINGTON, Sept. 15, 2026 — The Supreme Court rejected President Donald Trump’s attempt to impose new federal restrictions on mail voting before the midterm elections, delivering a significant defeat to the White House as ballots are already reaching voters.

Trump responded Tuesday by attacking the justices—including members of the Court he appointed—and accusing them of yielding to political pressure. The decision ensures that states can continue using their existing mail-voting procedures in November.

Elsewhere, a Congressional Budget Office assessment placed the cost of the Iran war at $38 billion through Aug. 1, a Republican congressman filed articles of impeachment against Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and the Senate blocked a major cryptocurrency bill amid unresolved concerns about Trump’s financial interests.

Supreme Court rejects Trump’s mail-ballot overhaul

The Supreme Court declined to let the administration enforce new Postal Service requirements for election mail during the 2026 midterms.

Trump’s policy would have required states to upload voter information to a federal system and use federally approved ballot envelopes with unique tracking barcodes. The Postal Service could have refused or returned election materials that did not comply.

The unsigned order left two lower-court injunctions in place. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh indicated that he might be open to some federal requirements in a future election, but the Court concluded that the administration had not justified imposing the new system after voting had begun.

The order does not definitively resolve every constitutional question surrounding the policy. It determines that the administration cannot implement the restrictions for the current election while the underlying litigation continues.

Federal judges Indira Talwani and Carl Nichols previously found that challengers were likely to establish that the Postal Service lacked authority to impose the requirements. Nichols was appointed by Trump.

The administration argued that standardized envelopes, barcodes and voter lists would improve tracking and combat fraud. States and voting-rights organizations warned that technical failures or mismatched records could prevent eligible voters from receiving or returning ballots.

Claims that the program was deliberately designed to suppress Democratic votes remain allegations about motive. The courts focused principally on presidential authority, state control over elections and the risk of disrupting lawful voting.

Nearly one-third of American voters cast ballots by mail in recent national elections. Eight states conduct elections principally by mail, while others offer absentee voting under varying rules.

The ruling gives state and local officials operational certainty: existing mail-ballot procedures will remain in effect for November unless a separate court order changes them. (Supreme Court orders page, Associated Press)

Trump lashes out at justices he appointed

Trump criticized the Supreme Court after the decision, saying the justices had surrendered to pressure from the “Radical Left.”

He praised Alito and Thomas while expressing frustration with the majority, which included his three appointees: Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Trump suggested that the Court had failed the Republican Party and produced decisions that would harm the country. He did not offer evidence that political pressure determined the justices’ votes.

Attorney General Todd Blanche said the administration would comply with the ruling.

Presidents are free to criticize court decisions. However, framing judicial legitimacy around whether judges support the president or his party can undermine the principle that courts decide cases independently of electoral interests.

Trump has praised the same Court when it upheld administration policies involving immigration, military service and executive control of federal agencies. He has attacked it after losses involving tariffs, birthright citizenship, Missouri redistricting and now mail voting.

The Court’s ideological composition remains conservative, but its members are not legally accountable to the president who nominated them. Justices receive life tenure partly to insulate them from political retaliation.

Trump’s explicit focus on the decision’s effect on Republicans is politically important. The administration has described the rules as neutral election-security measures, while the president characterized their rejection as damaging to his party.

That does not prove the policy had an unlawful partisan purpose. It does reinforce opponents’ concern that the administration viewed federal election rules through the lens of party advantage.

The confrontation leaves Trump campaigning against an institution he helped shape and may further increase pressure on election officials already facing threats and allegations of fraud. (Reuters, Associated Press)

CBO estimates Iran war has cost $38 billion

The United States had spent approximately $38 billion on the Iran war through Aug. 1, according to a new assessment from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

The CBO projected that costs would continue rising by about $3 billion per month if the conflict persisted at a comparable level.

The estimate is close to the $37.5 billion figure Hegseth provided during a July Senate hearing. It does not include some of the conflict’s most recent attacks or the long-term interest expense created by borrowing to finance military operations.

Munitions represent a large share of the cost. The report estimated that replenishing depleted American weapons inventories could take as long as five years.

Reuters reported in August that the United States had used nearly all its available long-range precision missiles. Hegseth subsequently sought almost $90 billion in emergency funding to rebuild military stockpiles.

The Pentagon did not cooperate with congressional financial auditors, according to the CBO assessment. That statement concerns access to information and does not by itself establish that Defense Department officials concealed unlawful spending.

The report also estimated that war-related economic disruptions could increase inflation by approximately half a percentage point during the first three months of 2027.

Attacks and restrictions around the Strait of Hormuz have raised petroleum and shipping costs. Diesel prices have exceeded $6 per gallon nationally, while elevated gasoline and freight costs have become major political liabilities for the administration.

Eighteen American service members have been killed during the conflict. Iranian and regional civilian and military casualties have numbered in the thousands.

The $38 billion estimate is substantially lower than the eventual cost of the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan. The comparison does not predict the Iran conflict’s ultimate expense, which depends on its duration, intensity, reconstruction obligations and long-term care for veterans.

The assessment creates a new challenge for Trump’s proposed $5,000 payments to American adults. War expenses, emergency defense funding and higher federal borrowing costs are competing with an election-year proposal that could itself cost more than $1 trillion. (Reuters, Congressional Budget Office)

Republican Thomas Massie seeks Hegseth’s impeachment

Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky filed articles of impeachment against Hegseth, accusing the defense secretary of conducting hostilities against Iran without congressional authorization.

Massie filed the resolution as privileged, which generally requires House leaders to address it within two legislative days.

The measure is unlikely to receive enough votes to impeach Hegseth. Its immediate importance is political: it could force Republican lawmakers to take a recorded position on an unpopular conflict shortly before leaving Washington to campaign.

Massie argues that Hegseth abused his authority by carrying out orders for military operations that Congress never authorized.

The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war, while presidents possess authority as commander in chief. Modern administrations of both parties have conducted significant military operations without formal declarations, creating a long-running dispute over the boundary between those powers.

The House previously passed a resolution directing Trump to end the Iran conflict unless Congress approved it. That resolution did not stop military operations, demonstrating the practical limits of congressional war-powers measures when the president refuses to comply or when legislation cannot overcome a veto.

The Pentagon defended Hegseth and said the department remained unified behind him. That statement represents the administration’s position; it does not resolve the constitutional question.

Massie lost his Republican primary after Trump and allied organizations supported his opponent. He is not seeking reelection, which gives him greater freedom to challenge the administration than colleagues facing Trump-aligned voters in November.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released Monday found Democrats leading Republicans 44% to 37% in congressional voting preference. Polls are snapshots rather than predictions, but the figures help explain why Republican leaders may want to avoid an extended debate over the war.

Impeachment by the House would require a majority vote. Removal from office would then require a two-thirds Senate vote following a trial—an exceptionally unlikely outcome under the current partisan balance. (Reuters)

Russia and Ukraine continue energy attacks despite Trump announcement

Russia and Ukraine continued striking each other’s energy infrastructure Tuesday, one day after Trump said both governments had agreed to stop.

The Russians launched approximately 200 drones at Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities overnight, according to Ukrainian officials. The attacks damaged petrol stations, port facilities and other infrastructure and killed at least two people.

Ukraine struck an oil refinery in Russia’s Samara region and facilities it identified as drone-production sites.

Zelenskyy said Ukraine was prepared to suspend energy attacks if it received credible guarantees that Russia would do the same.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov called Trump’s proposal a good idea but did not announce that Russia had entered a binding agreement. He said restoring safe commercial shipping would also be necessary to reduce global fuel prices.

The continued attacks demonstrate that Trump’s statement did not amount to an enforceable ceasefire.

It is possible that preliminary discussions occurred or that both governments conditionally accepted the concept. Neither explanation establishes that the parties agreed on a start time, covered facilities, monitoring system or consequences for violations.

Previous American attempts to arrange an energy-infrastructure truce have failed.

Russia has attacked Ukraine’s power system throughout the invasion and recently increased strikes on petrol stations. Ukraine has intensified its refinery campaign in an effort to reduce Russian military fuel supplies and oil revenue.

Trump urged Zelenskyy on Sunday to stop refinery attacks because he blamed them for the global diesel shortage. Asking Ukraine to halt without obtaining comparable Russian restraint would leave Kyiv absorbing strikes it had agreed not to answer in kind.

Tuesday’s events show that reducing fuel prices through an energy truce will require more than public declarations. A workable agreement would need written terms, independent monitoring and reciprocal commitments. (Reuters)

Senate blocks major cryptocurrency bill

The Senate failed to advance the Clarity Act, legislation intended to establish a comprehensive federal regulatory framework for cryptocurrency.

The procedural vote failed 49-50, short of the 60 votes required to move forward.

Republicans and the cryptocurrency industry argued that the legislation would give digital-asset companies predictable rules and clarify jurisdiction between the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Democrats demanded stronger ethics provisions addressing cryptocurrency businesses connected to Trump and his family.

The revised draft included restrictions on some digital-asset transactions by public officials and greater enforcement authority for state attorneys general. Opponents said those provisions did not go far enough and sought mandatory divestment requirements for presidents holding major crypto interests.

Trump and his family have received substantial income from cryptocurrency ventures, including World Liberty Financial and a Trump-branded meme coin. The financial relationships are documented. Whether any particular government decision was corruptly exchanged for private benefit would require evidence beyond the existence of those holdings.

The banking industry also raised concerns that interest-bearing stablecoins could draw money away from traditional deposits and reduce banks’ capacity to make loans. Crypto companies argue that those objections reflect resistance to competition.

The digital-asset industry has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on lobbying, campaign contributions and political advertising. Such spending is generally lawful when properly disclosed and conducted within contribution and coordination rules.

The bill’s defeat is a major setback for an industry that expected a Republican-controlled Congress and a crypto-friendly president to deliver legislation.

Congress is preparing to leave Washington before the midterms, making quick reconsideration unlikely. The existing patchwork of enforcement actions, state laws and agency interpretations therefore remains in place. (Reuters, Associated Press)

Kennedy Center plans closure after Trump naming dispute

The Kennedy Center’s board voted to close the performing-arts venue temporarily for renovations after a federal judge blocked an effort to restore Trump’s name to its facade.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper concluded that Congress must approve changes to the federally established memorial’s name.

The Trump-controlled board previously added the president’s name to the building. A court ordered it removed in May, and the latest ruling prevented the board from restoring it.

Trump has argued that recognition of his contributions is critical to his continued support for the center. Congress allocated approximately $257 million for safety repairs and renovations.

Federal funding cannot legally be conditioned on adding Trump’s name unless Congress authorizes that condition. A president or governing board cannot unilaterally rename a congressionally established memorial.

The center says it faces serious financial and structural problems. Artistic boycotts, canceled performances and declining revenue have followed Trump’s takeover of its leadership.

Those financial problems may be genuine even though they overlap with the naming dispute. The closure vote does not itself prove that renovations are being used to punish the court or pressure Congress.

The board has not released a complete public construction schedule identifying precisely how long the center will remain closed or how existing performances, employees and ticket holders will be handled.

The dispute reflects Trump’s broader effort to place his name and historical interpretation on federal institutions and landmarks. Courts have repeatedly distinguished between presidential influence and changes that require congressional approval. (Reuters, Associated Press)

FBI says it has new information about the Butler shooter

Attorney General Todd Blanche said the FBI had uncovered additional information about Thomas Matthew Crooks, the gunman who wounded Trump during a July 2024 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.

Blanche did not disclose what the information showed or whether it altered investigators’ previous conclusion that Crooks acted alone.

Trump recently claimed without evidence that the shooting was a “Democrat Plot.” Publicly released investigations have not established that Crooks was directed by the Democratic Party, a political organization or another person.

The FBI previously said it found no credible evidence connecting Crooks to a broader conspiracy. New biographical information would not establish political coordination unless supported by communications, financial records or other evidence linking him to additional actors.

Trump also said former FBI Director Christopher Wray should “pay a price” over the investigation. Disagreement with an investigative conclusion is not proof that an official committed misconduct or a crime.

The administration should release information that can be disclosed without compromising lawful investigative interests. Selective descriptions from political officials can create speculation without allowing the public to evaluate the underlying evidence.

Until the FBI provides details, Blanche’s announcement should be treated as notice of additional investigative findings—not proof of Trump’s allegation. (Reuters)

Courts and war costs reshape the midterm argument

Tuesday’s developments produced one of the clearest election-law outcomes of the campaign: Trump’s Postal Service ballot rules will not govern the November midterms.

The decision removes immediate uncertainty for election officials but intensifies Trump’s attacks on the judiciary. His criticism of his own appointees also underscores that federal judges do not serve as presidential representatives.

The CBO’s Iran assessment gives Democrats and antiwar Republicans a concrete figure—$38 billion—to connect the conflict with fuel prices, depleted weapons inventories and federal borrowing.

Massie’s impeachment resolution is unlikely to remove Hegseth, but it ensures that Congress will again confront the administration’s claim that it can sustain hostilities without a new authorization.

The cryptocurrency vote presents a different accountability question: whether Congress can regulate a rapidly growing industry while the president and his family maintain financial interests within it.

Taken together, the day’s news centered on institutional restraints. The Supreme Court limited presidential election policy, the Senate blocked an industry-backed bill, and Congress’ budget office placed measurable costs on a war that has continued without a traditional declaration.

Those restraints will not end political conflict before November. They do give voters clearer information about the rules governing ballots, the financial cost of foreign policy and the limits of presidential power.

More Politics: https://natalkradio.us/category/politics/

North American Talk Radio may earn a commission if you make a purchase through links in this article, at no additional cost to you.