Justice Brett Kavanaugh concurred with the majority opinion in the Supreme Court's denial of a stay on the mail-in ballot restriction.
Posted by Bulwark Takes, Checked
- Sources
- 3 support1 context
- Said
- 1 time·
- Confidence
- 90%
Bulwark TakesSep 15, 2026
The Supreme Court's unsigned September 14, 2026 order denied the government's stay request, and Justice Brett Kavanaugh filed a one-paragraph concurrence agreeing with that denial. The extracted claim is faithful to the passage, and the sources confirm the concurrence in the denial.
What was said
… So, essentially, the Trump administration was hoping that this injunction against its mail-in ballot rules could be stayed, as in, could be put aside, and the rule could go into effect. Court said no. Brett Kavanaugh concurred with the majority opinion, but he offered a little bit more in terms of his thinking, and you can see it on the screen here. I'll read it for those who are listening. Kavanaugh writes, In my view, based on the briefing the Court has received at this interim stage, there's at least a fair prospect fair, I want to get back to that in a second …
Bulwark Takes · · from the transcriptPost →What we found
Supports. CNN reports that Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence accompanied the unsigned Monday order rejecting the Postal Service mail-ballot rule, and that he suggested openness to the rule in future cycles.[2]
Supports. SCOTUSblog reports that Kavanaugh penned a one-paragraph concurrence agreeing with the decision to deny the government's request, while suggesting the Postal Service might have the power to issue the rule.[3]
Supports. Jurist quotes Kavanaugh's concurring opinion, which says applying the rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious because election officials lack sufficient time.[4]
Context. Reuters reports the denial and the unsigned one-paragraph order, with Alito and Thomas dissenting. The sources describe Kavanaugh's concurrence as a concurrence in the denial, not a dissent, so the claim's core holds.[1]
Sources
4 sources: 1 fact-checker, 1 tier 2, 2 not rated
- 1In loss for Trump, US Supreme Court won't let Postal ...reuters.com · fact-checker · cited for: context
- 2What the Supreme Court's cryptic mail ballot ruling means ...cnn.com · tier 2 · cited for: supports
- 3Supreme Court denies Trump administration's request to implement parts of rule on mail-in votingscotusblog.com · not rated · cited for: supports
- 4US Supreme Court rejects DOJ bid to stay injunction blocking USPS mail-in ballot rulejurist.org · not rated · cited for: supports
Where this claim was made
Said in 1 published post
Related claims
- Justice Kavanaugh joined the concurrence in the Supreme Court mail-in ballot order.True
- The Supreme Court granted a stay in a legal case regarding mail-in ballot restrictions.True
- Justice Kavanaugh justified the decision on the mail-in ballot rule by stating that it was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedures Act because it was too close to Election Day.True
- Supreme Court Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett voted against Donald Trump in the case regarding mail-in ballot restrictions.True
- Justice Thomas joined Justice Alito's dissent in the Supreme Court mail-in ballot order.True