
All Rise News
States Fight Trump's Latest Voting Power Grab: Live with AG Weiser
Why It Matters
The lawsuit challenges a federal overreach that could reshape how states conduct elections, directly affecting voter access and election integrity across the U.S. Understanding the legal limits of presidential power and the enforcement of state election laws is crucial for safeguarding democracy amid ongoing misinformation and political pressure.
Key Takeaways
- •20+ states sue to block Trump's election executive order.
- •Colorado's mail-in voting deemed secure, called gold standard.
- •Tina Peters conviction upheld; sentencing review avoids speech-based factors.
- •Trump lacks authority to pardon state criminal convictions.
- •AG Weiser filed 64 lawsuits defending Colorado against federal overreach.
Pulse Analysis
The coalition of more than twenty states, led by Colorado Attorney General Bill Weiser, filed a federal lawsuit in Massachusetts to block President Trump's recent executive order that would place the Department of Homeland Security in charge of voter lists and mail‑in ballot distribution. The complaint argues that the order exceeds constitutional limits, asserting that the president has no authority to dictate voter eligibility or to commandeer the Postal Service for partisan purposes. By challenging this unprecedented attempt at federal election control, the states aim to preserve the long‑standing principle that each state determines the time, place, and manner of its elections.
Colorado’s mail‑in voting system is repeatedly highlighted as a national model, combining accessibility with rigorous security safeguards. The state reports that fraud rates are vanishingly low—four fraudulent votes per ten million cast—supporting the claim that absentee ballots are both safe and reliable. AG Weiser emphasized that even President Trump used Colorado’s mail‑in process in 2020, underscoring the hypocrisy of his current attacks. By defending the “gold‑standard” system, Colorado not only protects its voters but also counters a broader narrative that seeks to delegitimize widely used voting methods across the country.
The recent Colorado Court of Appeals decision reaffirmed former Clerk Tina Peters’ convictions for election‑equipment tampering, while ordering a resentencing that excludes any consideration of her political speech. The ruling reinforces the separation of state and federal sovereignty, rejecting President Trump’s claim that a presidential pardon could nullify state criminal judgments. It also signals that officials who jeopardize election integrity will face serious penalties, regardless of partisan pressure. Together with the 64 lawsuits filed by AG Weiser against the Trump administration, the case illustrates a growing legal front defending state‑run elections and the rule of law against federal overreach.
Episode Description
Colorado AG Phil Weiser just filed his 64th lawsuit against the Trump admin, seeking to block his attack on mail-in voting.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...