Media’s Misleading Voting Coverage Poses Dangers 

The media is an important protector of democracy. It has an obligation to be accurate and clear, especially amid the fast-moving changes in election litigation.  

Unfortunately, several media organizations have failed this basic test in recent weeks in their coverage of the federal courts’ actions on President Donald Trump’s executive order about mail-in voting. To be fair, the issues are complicated, and the litigation has been fast-paced. But those circumstances do not absolve news entities of the need to report accurately. Sensationalist headlines and explanations without context only confuse voters, which could depress turnout and undermine confidence in the election—perhaps part of Trump’s goal. 

Just consider some of the headlines after the Supreme Court’s order on August 24, 2026, which was purely a procedural ruling and which said nothing about whether his executive order on mail-in balloting is lawful. On Bluesky, the Associated Press wrote: “The Supreme Court has cleared the way for President Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting ahead of midterms.” The same headline appeared on X/Twitter. The story itself began by saying, “The Supreme Court opened a path Monday for possible implementation of President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting, though it remains unclear how much can be put in place before the fast-approaching midterm elections.” The New York Times wrote, “Court Allows Trump to Pursue Mail Voting Limits, for Now.” On August 30, NPR reported, “for now, the Trump administration can go ahead with its efforts to curtail mail-in voting.” 

These statements missed the mark. Contrary to the AP’s headline, the Court’s August 24 order did not clear the way for Trump to limit mail-in voting. A lower court had issued an injunction against Trump’s order, and the Supreme Court’s decision put that injunction on hold, saying that the lower court’s ruling was premature. Specifically, the Court held that the states that had challenged the executive order did not have standing at that time to bring their claims given that the U.S. Postal Service had not issued a final rule on how it would implement Trump’s order. This was a procedural ruling that did not determine the substantive merits of the case. The Court’s majority made this very point in its written decision, explaining that its ruling “does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful. On that score, time will tell.” In other words, the litigation would continue when the USPS issued a rule on how it would proceed to implement Trump’s order. (The USPS had actually issued its rule on the Friday night before the Supreme Court’s Monday order, yet the Court did not acknowledge this point.) Indeed, a lower court quickly enjoined the Trump executive order after the USPS issued its rule, so the Supreme Court’s August 24 decision had little practical effect.  

Most news stories eventually explained that the Court’s order was a preliminary step in what would surely be a longer dispute, but including that context does not cure the harm from the sensationalist headlines. NPR added a “post-broadcast correction” a day later, explaining that “This story incorrectly describes the status of President Trump’s executive order on mail-in voting. The effort to curtail mail-in voting has been blocked by a 14-day temporary restraining order that the Trump administration is appealing.” But people are busy and often read only the top-level takeaway. Many likely missed the NPR correction. I heard from several people who told me they believed the Supreme Court’s ruling meant that Trump could upend mail-in voting for the midterm elections because of what they read from headlines or news alerts. One person said she saw many social media posts claiming Trump had won the battle over mail-in voting, which would cause chaos for the midterms. None of that was accurate.  

Implementing this executive order, at this late stage in the election cycle, would cause chaos for election administrators and voters. States are already beginning to send out their mail-in ballots. But it is simply incorrect that the Court’s August 24 ruling allowed this to occur. Now that the USPS issued its rule and a lower court enjoined it from going into effect, the Trump administration has gone to the Supreme Court again. This time, the Court will rule on the merits of the dispute. It is unlikely that the Court will allow the Trump administration to implement its order given its dubious constitutionality and the turmoil it would create for election officials. Of course, anything is possible with this Court, but most election law experts think that the Court should reject the Trump administration’s gambit to change the rules so close to the election.  

Yet part of Trump’s goal is to create doubt among the electorate. If Americans think the Court has allowed Trump to change the rules, they may not bother voting. And if Republicans lose in the midterms, the confusion unleashed—even if the executive order is never implemented—can serve as fodder to undermine the results. So, even if Trump loses in Court, he succeeds if people question the election process. The media’s misreporting feeds into that cycle.  

In a recent Gallup poll, conducted before the Court’s initial order in the mail-in balloting case, two-thirds of Americans said they were concerned that political leaders would pressure election officials to change election outcomes. Fifty-seven percent said they were worried about “[b]allots not being properly handled, counted or secured.” Half of respondents were concerned that their ballot would be counted.  

Misleading media reports on the legality of Trump’s executive order only exacerbate the problem.  

In the next few months, there will likely be a flood of election litigation. The news media should ensure its reporting—especially its headlines and alerts—is accurate and clear. Election law reporting requires special precision. Sensationalist headlines that fail to convey nuance can harm the public’s understanding of our democratic processes and ultimately undermine faith in our elections. 
 

The post Media’s Misleading Voting Coverage Poses Dangers  appeared first on Washington Monthly.