Justice Kavanaugh joined the majority opinion written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson regarding the Executive Order 14399 case.
Posted by Badlands Media, Checked
- Sources
- 2 contradict
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 75%
Badlands MediaSep 16, 2026
The claim that Justice Jackson wrote the majority opinion in the Executive Order 14399 case is contradicted: the Supreme Court's order lifting the block on the mail-voting order was a per curiam (unsigned) opinion, and Jackson dissented separately. Kavanaugh's majority membership is not contradicted, but the authorship claim is central and fails.
A guest makes this claim. Listeners heard it, so it counts against the post, and on the guest's own record.
What was said
… Yeah, but he says he agrees with Thomas and Alito, which is this was not a decision on the merits. This is a, this is a, this was denied because of timeliness, and Autopen Jackson is the one that wrote the opinion. Again, Kavanaugh joined it, and he should be mocked to his face for that. Anybody that sees him should mock him to his face for signing on to Autopen Jackson's ridiculous order. …
Badlands Media · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Contradicts. Jurist reports that the Supreme Court stayed the injunction against Executive Order 14399 in a per curiam opinion, so no justice authored it as a signed majority opinion, and that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented separately.[2]
Contradicts. AP reports that the Supreme Court's emergency order on the revamped voter database was decided by a conservative majority, with the three liberal-leaning justices publicly dissenting, which is consistent with Jackson being in dissent rather than writing the majority in the related Trump administration election-order cases.[1]
Supports. Kavanaugh was in the conservative majority in the August 2026 mail-voting order ruling, so the claim's statement that he joined the majority is plausible, though no source explicitly confirms his vote in that per curiam.[2]
Context. The post's own words call the opinion Jackson's 'order' and say the ruling was denied on timeliness grounds, which the sources do not support as a Jackson-authored majority opinion.[2]
Sources
2 sources: 1 fact-checker, 1 not rated
- 1Supreme Court lets Trump administration use revamped federal voter eligibility database for nowapnews.com · fact-checker · cited for: contradicts
- 2US Supreme Court lifts block on Trump mail voting executive orderjurist.org · not rated · cited for: contradicts, supports, context
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- Justice Ketanji Brown-Jackson dissented from the Supreme Court's decision regarding the Trump administration's mail-in voting executive order.True
- The Supreme Court issued a 5-4 decision regarding an executive order, with Justices Jackson, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Chief Justice Roberts dissenting.False
- The Supreme Court issued a 7 to 2 decision regarding Executive Order 14399.Mixed
- Justice Kavanaugh joined the concurrence in the Supreme Court mail-in ballot order.True
- Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred with the majority opinion in the Supreme Court's denial of a stay on the mail-in ballot restriction.True