On-again, off-again mail-in ballot police. Just days after the Supreme Court gave Mr. Trump leeway to proceed on his Postal Service policing of mail-in ballots, a federal judge has shut it down again.
Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee to the court in Massachusetts — and a frequent stumbling block for Mr. Trump — said the president’s plans are likely “unconstitutional” because they interfere with states’ ability to run elections.
That decision blocked the move for a second time. Judge Talwani first blocked it in June while considering the challenge by roughly 23 mostly Democratic-led states plus the District of Columbia.
On Thursday, the judge said that absent a restraining order, states would have been forced to redesign their ballot mail envelopes, reorder those supplies, train election officials to comply with the new federal mandate and provide voter lists to the postal service, all before the election.
“The risk of irreparable harm to voters in those jurisdictions is grave,” Judge Talwani said.
The Justice Department is likely to attempt to appeal her ruling, though temporary restraining orders aren’t always deemed subject to appeals.
But at some point the matter is certain to rush back to the Supreme Court, which earlier this week erased a previous blockade from Judge Talwani, ruling that it wasn’t ripe.
Under the now-blocked rule, states that want to allow voting by mail would be required to submit lists of eligible voters to the postal service. States would then have to use approved envelopes to send the ballots out and to get the ballots back — and they must be marked with unique barcodes so they can be tracked.
The postal service’s plan was issued in response to a directive from Mr. Trump, who issued an executive order in March calling for federal intervention to ensure only legitimate voters get ballots.
Meta will pay states up to $17.1 billion and implement new safety features for teen social media users to settle a landmark case that accused the tech giant of pushing harmful content to children.
California, Virginia, Indiana, Kentucky and New Jersey were among 33 states that sued Meta in 2023 over its Facebook and Instagram platforms, saying the Big Tech giant knowingly features addictive and harmful content while shielding that information from the public.
Now the states in the settlement — which grew to 47 — are figuring out how to spend all that money.
Virginia is slated to receive $353 million, state Attorney General Jay Jones said.
“For years, Meta intentionally deceived the public about the addictive and harmful design features that have wreaked havoc on youth mental health. I am elated to announce a settlement agreement that will put an end to these dangerous practices and deliver meaningful relief that will protect children from online harm,” Mr. Jones said.
The agreement requires Meta to implement new safety features for children who use Instagram and Facebook, among them time limits aimed at stopping “endless scrolling.”
The agreement also requires Meta to block children from Instagram and Facebook from midnight to 6 a.m. and limit access to the platforms during school time, among other changes.
Indiana is set to receive up to $419.4 million in the settlement, Attorney General Todd Rokita said. He called the new safety requirements “groundbreaking changes” that will reduce compulsive use and resulting anxiety and depression among teen users.
One of the new safety requirements will limit beauty filters and visible “like” counts that harm the mental health of kids and teenagers.
An independent auditor and the 47 states included in the settlement will monitor the implementation and efficacy of the new safety features, he said.
While lawmakers and advocates praised the settlement, they said Congress still needs to pass long-awaited legislation to protect kids online.