Whew. A huge sigh of relief for the millions of Americans who vote by mail after the Supreme Court shut the door on President Donald Trump's plan to use the U.S. Postal Service to restrict the practice in this fall's elections.

Status quo prevails! But the nitty-gritty legal fight is far from over. The drama now returns to the district courts, where Trump's Justice Department, pro-voter groups and Democratic officials will wrangle over the plan's fate for 2028.

A good sign is that so far, federal judges on both sides of the political spectrum have rebuffed the administration's rationale for their mail voting overhaul. But in the end, this is all very likely to wind up back at the Supreme Court.

So what tea leaves were left in Monday's ruling? At least five justices cast serious doubt on Trump's chances of succeeding with the plan in its current form, but we don't know exactly which ones.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh left the door open for the Postal Service to implement the mail ballot changes in the future. And Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, in their dissent, said their colleagues were wrong and Trump should be able to press go right now.

To borrow a phrase from the Court itself on whether this is all legal or not: "Time will tell." And we'll be tracking it all.

➤ What’s next for mail voting litigation

Say what you will about North Carolina Republicans, but those guys stick together.

On Wednesday, Republican judges on the Court of Appeals blessed the Republican-dominated General Assembly’s power grab that has kept the State Board of Elections in Republican hands.

The ruling means the Republican state auditor will continue to oversee the elections board rather than the governor, who had that power for more than a century until Roy Cooper – a Democrat — moved into the governor’s mansion. Protected by gerrymandered legislative maps, the GOP supermajority passed a law stripping that power and giving it to themselves in 2023.

That law got blocked in the courts, and another Democrat, Josh Stein, won the 2024 gubernatorial race, so Republican lawmakers enacted a new law giving the state auditor — who just so happened to be a Republican — power to appoint the State Board of Elections.

Stein sued, and again a lower court agreed the GOP scheme was “unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt.” But on appeal, the Court of Appeals quickly stayed that ruling while it deliberated, then reversed it in a 2-1 party-line decision Wednesday.

Under GOP control, the state board has repeatedly enacted policies to make voting harder.

While an appeal to the state Supreme Court is likely, a different outcome is not. Republicans hold a 5-2 majority on the high court. But with judicial elections coming this year and in 2028, the GOP’s grip on judicial power in the Tar Heel State might be coming to an end.

 ➤ More on the North Carolina election board power tussle

In July, we reported that Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D) announced her plan to restore voting rights for more than 66,000 people who’ve served time for felony convictions. We’ve also covered a January federal court ruling that found the state’s ban on former felons voting is unlawful.

But neither of those actions have led to the complete restoration of voting rights for this population, nor explain why a ballot initiative is needed this November to formally get rid of the state ban.

This story explains why there are still thousands of Virginians with past felony convictions who remain disenfranchised, why Spanberger’s efforts haven’t resulted in complete re-enfranchisement, and why the court ruling didn’t automatically reinstate those rights for this group.

One of the chief culprits: the court ruling only applied to those disenfranchised for committing crimes that were not deemed felonies under a Jim Crow-era law – drug offenses, for example. The November ballot initiative allows voters to determine whether people with past felony convictions of any kind should have their voting rights automatically restored immediately upon completing time served.

Right now, the governor has the sole authority to restore their voting rights – and only if they apply for it – but a majority vote in favor of the ballot referendum would mean the application and governor’s intervention would no longer be necessary. Virginia is currently one of only three states that permanently bar felons from voting, and the voting ban disproportionately disenfranchises Black Virginia voters.

➤ Here’s what’s at stake

Odds and ends

➤ Missouri voters hit top election official with second lawsuit over gerrymandered map

➤ Trump started a redistricting war. Now 1 in 10 Americans are in new House districts

➤ Exclusive: These international observers have monitored US elections for decades. This time, the Trump admin didn’t invite them

➤ Wisconsin Supreme Court hears challenges to pro-GOP congressional gerrymander

➤ Appeals court rejects New Hampshire’s bid to quickly dismiss DOJ’s voter data lawsuit

Slack message of the week

What you can do