Power Check

Monday's Supreme Court order let Trump's mail-ballot restrictions move forward by a 6-3 vote, lifting a Massachusetts injunction — but the Postal Service piece of the order stays blocked nationwide, and the Court never touched whether any of it is actually legal. Grant and Maya return to the case they flagged as a Purcell test and find the Court sidestepped the doctrine entirely, resolving things on standing and ripeness instead. They walk through Sotomayor's concurrence calling out the government for wanting it both ways, and Jackson's dissent warning the ruling invites the 'pre-election chaos' Purcell was supposed to prevent. One host sees a functioning, if messy, judicial process; the other sees a procedural trapdoor that lets the executive act while ballots are already printing. They close by weighing whether judicial review checked anything here, or just delayed the question until after it matters. Published the week of August 24, 2026.

The Solicitor General is asking the Supreme Court to not just rule on Trump's mail-ballot order but to explain why, while a Boston judge stacks a second nationwide injunction on top of the first. Grant and Maya dig into the Purcell principle and whether the emergency docket has any rules at all.

Grant and Maya break down what survived Trump v. Illinois, why Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence reads like directions to a different statute, and why the Insurrection Act would be far harder to challenge in court than the law the Supreme Court just narrowed.

Grant and Maya return to Trump's USPS mail-ballot order now that the Solicitor General has taken it to the Supreme Court with 90 days until the midterms, and ask whether courts can move faster than a printing schedule.

Grant and Maya break down how the White House budget office can cancel congressionally approved money without a single vote, and what GAO, the courts, and a stopgap bill to December 4 can actually do about it.

Grant and Maya revisit Louisiana v. Callais to score which states actually won the mid-decade redistricting race, then dig into how Missouri's Secretary of State used an eight-month signature count to neutralize a 300,000-person referendum before a single court could rule.

Grant and Maya break down Trump v. Barbara, the 6-3 ruling that struck down Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, and ask why the same Court that just gutted Humphrey's Executor drew a hard line here.

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court handed down two rulings within the same hour: a 6-3 decision obliterating Humphrey's Executor and a separate 5-4 ruling blocking Trump from firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. Grant and Maya break down what just changed, why the Fed got its own carve-out, and whether that protection will hold.

The Supreme Court is days away from ruling in Trump v. Slaughter, a case that could erase 90 years of limits on presidential power over independent agencies. Grant and Maya break down what Humphrey's Executor actually did, how the conservative supermajority already tipped its hand, and what happens to the FTC, NLRB, EEOC, and possibly the Federal Reserve if the ruling goes the way most legal observers expect.

On April 29, the Supreme Court's ruling in Louisiana v. Callais gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act and touched off a redistricting frenzy across Republican-led states. Grant and Maya break down exactly what the Court did, how it connects to an earlier 2019 ruling that blocked partisan gerrymandering challenges, and why Florida, Tennessee, and at least four other states are now racing to redraw congressional maps before November.