{"id":509,"date":"2026-08-13T21:57:17","date_gmt":"2026-08-13T21:57:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509"},"modified":"2026-08-13T21:57:17","modified_gmt":"2026-08-13T21:57:17","slug":"trump-administration-asks-scotus-to-rule-soon-on-mail-in-voting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509","title":{"rendered":"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting"},"content":{"rendered":"

We\u2019re looking for more submissions for the Ask Amy section of this newsletter. Please send your burning questions about the Supreme Court to [email\u00a0protected].<\/p>

Read more Trump administration urges Supreme Court to issue a decision in mail-in voting dispute<\/a><\/p>

At the Court<\/h2>

On July 27, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on its emergency docket to clear the way for the implementation of President Donald Trump\u2019s executive order on mail-in voting. Twelve states later echoed this request in their own application. Last week, the group of 23 states and the District of Columbia challenging the order the court to deny these requests. On Wednesday, the Trump administration the justices to \u201cpromptly\u201d issue their decision. For more on the new filing, see the On Site section below.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court released its calendar for the .<\/p><\/div><\/div>

The court is set to release the second of three summer order lists on Monday at 9:30 a.m. EDT. (We discussed what these lists typically address in our July 13 newsletter.)<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Morning Reads<\/h2>

The little-noticed Supreme Court case that could impact where people pray<\/h3>

John Fritze, CNN<\/p>

In early 2021, Daniel Grand, an Orthodox Jew, set out \u201cto host a small prayer session at his home near Cleveland.\u201d But when city officials learned of his planned event, they \u201csent him a cease-and-desist notice demanding that he first obtain a special-use permit,\u201d according to CNN. The resulting dispute over the city\u2019s rules for small religious gatherings in private homes \u2013 and more specifically, the question of \u201cwhether Grand could sue before he received a definitive denial of a permit\u201d \u2013 will be considered by the Supreme Court during the upcoming term. CNN noted that the case could \u201cexpand the power of churches, synagogues and other religious entities to challenge zoning laws that restrict their access to residential neighborhoods.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Apple App Store Rate Proceeding Halted by Supreme Court for Now<\/h3>

Leah Nylen, Bloomberg<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

During the 2026-27 term, the Supreme Court will hear argument on contempt charges against Apple that were levied by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in a dispute between Apple and Epic Games over Apple\u2019s App Store. Rogers held Apple in contempt after ordering it to allow game developers like Epic to direct users to external storefronts for in-app purchases, determining that the company failed to comply with that ruling when \u201cit imposed a new 27% commission on revenue generated\u201d through such purchases, according to Bloomberg. On Tuesday, Rogers denied Apple\u2019s motion to pause proceedings in her court on the commission while the Supreme Court considers the case on the contempt finding. In response, Apple on Wednesday came to the Supreme Court on its emergency docket, asking the justices to stay lower-court proceedings \u201cwhile the Supreme Court considers the case since a ruling by the justices could render further hearings moot.\u201d Hours later, Justice Elena Kagan issued an administrative stay that paused proceedings for one day, giving \u201cthe high court more time to consider Apple\u2019s request for a longer-term stop.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

New Evidence Shows Agents Using Slurs, Bolstering Profiling Claims<\/h3>

Jazmine Ulloa, Maia Spoto, and Jill Cowan, The New York Times<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

In lawsuits filed across the country, civil rights groups have challenged \u201cthe Trump administration\u2019s mass deportation campaign,\u201d contending that immigration arrests involve unlawful racial profiling. \u201c[B]ody-camera footage, text messages and other documents emerging from\u201d these lawsuits appear to support these claims, showing, for example, federal agents referring to \u201ctargets\u201d by \u201cderogatory,\u201d race-based terms, according to The New York Times. However, \u201ceven as evidence of racial profiling has come to light, what seemed like settled law \u2013 that law enforcement officers could not question or detain someone solely based on their race or ethnicity \u2013 has turned out to be far more of an open question when it comes to immigration enforcement.\u201d The Times noted that the Supreme Court\u2019s 2025 emergency docket decision allowing federal officers to more freely make immigration stops in the Los Angeles area added to the confusion. \u201cThe lawsuit that led to the court\u2019s temporary decision and other similar suits are still working their way through lower courts, and it could be months before they are resolved and years before the Supreme Court has a chance to say more.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Bruce is dead; last-ditch plea to U.S. Supreme Court can\u2019t save dog\u2019s life<\/h3>

Scott Steepleton, Camarillo Acorn<\/p>

On Wednesday, a legal battle over the fate of a dog named Bruce, who was \u201cordered euthanized\u201d after \u201cbeing declared vicious,\u201d arrived on the Supreme Court\u2019s emergency docket. Attorneys representing Santa Paula Animal Rescue Center and Bruce\u2019s guardian, Claire Birgy, urged the justices to \u201cprevent Ventura County Animal Services from euthanizing the dog while his federal appeal remains pending,\u201d according to the Camarillo Acorn. That appeal asks whether the rescue center retained rights to have a say in Bruce\u2019s future after adopting him out to Birgy. Before the Supreme Court responded to the request, Bruce was put down.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

How Democrats can repair the broken Supreme Court<\/h3>

Adam Schiff, Los Angeles Times<\/p>

In a column for the Los Angeles Times, Sen. Adam Schiff, a Democrat representing California, argued that \u201c[f]uture Democratic majorities in Congress \u2014 perhaps starting as soon as January \u2014 should make repairing the [Supreme Court] and reforming the judicial branch a priority to make sure it does not continue to operate as a partisan and retrograde institution.\u201d Specifically, he called on Democrats to \u201cenact term limits for Supreme Court justices,\u201d \u201cexpand the number of justices sitting on the court to reflect the expanded size of our nation,\u201d and \u201ccreate an enforceable code of ethics, bringing this court under the same set of rules of accountability as other leaders privileged to be in public service.\u201d \u201cThese proposals would help restore balance and credibility to the court,\u201d Schiff wrote.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

On Site<\/h2>
Court News<\/span>

Trump administration urges Supreme Court to issue a decision in mail-in voting dispute <\/h3>

By Amy Howe<\/p>

The Trump administration on Wednesday reiterated its request for the court to move quickly to block a ruling by a federal judge in Massachusetts that prohibits the government from implementing part of an executive order on mail-in voting in 23 states and the District of Columbia for the November elections. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the justices that \u201cit is critical that the Court act promptly on the pending\u201d request, which was filed on July 27 and has now been fully briefed for more than a week.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
From the SCOTUSblog Team<\/span>

Are Republicans falling out of love with the Supreme Court? <\/h3>

By Kelsey Dallas<\/p>

To say that Republicans are more supportive than Democrats of the Supreme Court and less supportive of reform efforts is not to say that Republicans are entirely satisfied with the court. Indeed, many new polls included signs of growing Republican unrest.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
SCOTUS Outside Opinions<\/span>

SCOTUS has issued its decisions. Now Congress has the floor.<\/h3>

By James Valvo & Cindy Crawford<\/p>

In a column for SCOTUSblog, James Valvo and Cindy Crawford call on Congress to \u201cdo better\u201d when responding to Supreme Court rulings with which it disagrees. \u201cAt the end of each Supreme Court term, it should make a habit of embracing its core constitutional responsibility by providing statutory responses to the court\u2019s decisions,\u201d they wrote.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Podcasts<\/h2>
Divided Argument<\/span>

Very Civilized Orangutans<\/h3>

Will Baude and Dan Epps discuss Hunter v. United States, which holds that a plea bargain\u2019s appeal waiver if unenforceable when enforcing it would work a \u201cmiscarriage of justice.\u201d They consider where that rule comes from and why the opinion commanded so much agreement.<\/p>

Read more SCOTUS has issued its decisions. Now Congress has the floor.<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Amarica’s Constitution<\/span>

There You Go Again<\/h3>

The president did not file for reconsideration of the court\u2019s birthright citizenship decision, but he nevertheless didn\u2019t let the Constitution rest, issuing two new executive orders that purport to extend the set of persons not receiving citizenship upon their birth. Akhil Amar and Andy Lipka take a look.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

A Closer Look<\/div>

Utah v. Mullins<\/h3><\/div>

Over the past 14 years, the Supreme Court has issued three significant rulings on how the Eighth Amendment\u2019s ban on \u201ccruel and unusual punishments\u201d applies in the context of sentencing juvenile offenders to life in prison without the possibility of parole.<\/p>

First, in 2012, it held in Miller v. Alabama<\/em> that \u201cthe Eighth Amendment forbids a sentencing scheme that mandates\u201d this sentence, and that, in general, the sentence of life without parole should be \u201cuncommon\u201d and imposed only after a sentencer has considered a child\u2019s \u201cdiminished culpability and heightened capacity for change.\u201d Then, in 2016\u2019s Montgomery v. Louisiana<\/em>, the court considered whether Miller<\/em> applied retroactively, holding that it does and again emphasizing \u201cthat sentencing a child to life without parole is excessive for all but the \u2018rare juvenile offender whose crime reflects irreparable corruption.\u2019\u201d<\/p>

Finally, in 2021, the court decided Jones v. Mississippi<\/em>, which asked whether, under Miller <\/em>and Montgomery<\/em>, a sentencer must \u201cmake a separate factual finding of permanent incorrigibility before sentencing the defendant to life without parole.\u201d It held that no such factual finding is necessary, because, according to the majority, Miller<\/em> required only \u201cthat a sentencer consider youth as a mitigating factor.\u201d<\/p>

With these three rulings, the court aimed to clear up persistent confusion over what exactly a trial court needs to consider when sentencing a juvenile offender to a life sentence without any chance of parole. And yet questions still linger, according to a petition for review awaiting the court\u2019s attention, which urges the court to again address these circumstances.<\/p>

The petition centers on Morris Mullins, who was charged with the rape and aggravated murder of Amy Davis in May 2001, when he was 17 years old. \u201cMullins pled guilty to aggravated murder in exchange for the State dropping the rape charge and taking the death penalty off the table,\u201d according to the Utah Supreme Court. During the sentencing phase of Mullins\u2019 trial, the judge considered whether he should be eligible for parole in the future, hearing competing claims about his dysfunctional upbringing and propensity for violence. The judge ultimately sentenced Mullins to life without parole but expressed hope that he would make something of his life. \u201c[I]f you\u2019re gonna be with us for a long time and have a chance to change, I hope\u2014not under the present circumstances\u2014I\u2019m hoping you\u2019ll find some way to be productive,\u201d the judge said.<\/p>

After the Supreme Court decided Miller<\/em>, Mullins challenged his sentence, contending that the judge had not properly considered his age and that, as a result, his sentence was unconstitutional. A Utah district court disagreed, concluding that the judge had appropriately weighed Mullins\u2019 age along with other mitigating factors. However, the Utah Supreme Court, in a , held that the record was unclear as to whether the sentencing court \u201cproperly consider[ed] Mullins\u2019s youth\u201d and noted that the judge, through his final comment to Mullins, appeared to acknowledge that he \u201cmight have the capacity for change.\u201d It vacated Mullins\u2019 sentence and remanded the case back to the district court for resentencing.<\/p>

In its to the U.S. Supreme Court, Utah asserts that the state supreme court\u2019s ruling is the product of ongoing confusion surrounding \u201cMiller<\/em> and its progeny.\u201d The state asks the justices to address whether a judge may sentence a juvenile to life without parole even after suggesting that the \u201cjuvenile is capable of change and reform,\u201d noting that \u201cstate and federal courts are split on\u201d this question. Utah further argues that the Supreme Court should side with those courts that have found \u201cthat even corrigible juvenile offenders may be sentenced to\u201d life without parole, because, in their view, \u201cconsideration of youth\u201d is all that\u2019s required by the Miller <\/em>line of cases, not a specific outcome after such consideration.<\/p>

In his to the petition for review, Mullins contends that the U.S. Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction over his case, because it has \u201cnot reached final judgment.\u201d This is because Mullins\u2019 \u201cresentencing has yet to take place.\u201d Mullins further argues that \u201cthe question presented has little significance\u201d for the country, because \u201c[o]nly a small and shrinking number of states ever impose life without parole on juvenile offenders.\u201d<\/p>

Utah v. Mullins<\/em> is scheduled to be considered by the justices for the first time at their \u201clong conference\u201d on Sept. 28.<\/p>

Read more Are Republicans falling out of love with the Supreme Court?<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/div>

SCOTUS Quote<\/h2>

JUSTICE SCALIA: \u201cWe \u2013 we have to assume ignorance of the drafter.\u201d<\/p>

JUSTICE BREYER: \u201cYes, ignorance of other laws.\u201d<\/p>

JUSTICE SCALIA: \u201cAs a general principle.\u201d<\/p>

JUSTICE BREYER: \u201cThat’s right, general ignorance.\u201d<\/p>

\u2014 (2012)<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Plus, are Republicans falling out of love with the Supreme Court?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,19,5,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-509","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-amaricas-constitution","category-divided-argument","category-from-the-scotusblog-team","category-newsletter"],"yoast_head":"\nTrump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting - American Service Review<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Plus, are Republicans falling out of love with the Supreme Court?\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-08-13T21:57:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/46a2e2659f120ff450def4f4d3eae696.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1333\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-13T21:57:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509\"},\"wordCount\":2105,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Amarica's Constitution\",\"Divided Argument\",\"From the SCOTUSblog Team\",\"Newsletter\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509\",\"name\":\"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-13T21:57:17+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":627},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=509#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"American Service Review\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting - American Service Review","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting - American Service Review","og_description":"Plus, are Republicans falling out of love with the Supreme Court?","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-08-13T21:57:17+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":1333,"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/46a2e2659f120ff450def4f4d3eae696.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting","datePublished":"2026-08-13T21:57:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509"},"wordCount":2105,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","articleSection":["Amarica's Constitution","Divided Argument","From the SCOTUSblog Team","Newsletter"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509","name":"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-13T21:57:17+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","width":1200,"height":627},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=509#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Trump administration asks SCOTUS to rule soon on mail-in voting"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/","name":"American Service Review","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/americanservicereview.com"],"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/509","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=509"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/509\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=509"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=509"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=509"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}