Legal AF by MeidasTouch - Trump Gets Instantly Checkmated with Massive Lawsuit

Episode Date: April 3, 2026

In breaking news, a new Emergency suit has been filed to block Trump’s efforts on Tuesday to have the Department of Homeland Security, Social Security Administration and Postal Service (!!), stand between voters and the ballot box and deny mail in ballots to eligible voters, in violation of the Constitution, the Voting Rights Act, the Privacy Act, and seeking an immediate injunction. Popok is on the case to explain why this latest attempt by Trump to steal power from the States should immediately fail like the one he did last year about voter ID. Delete Me: Get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to join https://joindeleteme.com/LEGALAF and use promo code LEGALAF at checkout. Subscribe:  @LegalAFMTN  Visit https://meidasplus.com for more! Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show The Ken Harbaugh Show: https://meidasnews.com/tag/the-ken-harbaugh-show Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This episode is brought to you by Tellus Online Security. Oh, tax season is the worst. You mean hack season? Sorry, what? Yeah, cybercriminals love tax forms. But I've got Tellus Online Security. It helps protect against identity theft and financial fraud so I can stress less during tax season or any season.

Plan started just $12 a month. Learn more at tellus.com slash online security. No one can prevent all cybercrime or identity theft. Conditions apply. In breaking news, just as we expected off of Donald Trump's Tuesday executive order to try to block mail-in ballots from even being delivered to Americans in usurping the power of the states to control federal elections, we've got our first suit to block the executive order filed in Massachusetts

by a group of public interest voting rights group, led by the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, and brought against the Trump administration to block the executive order, finding that it violates the Voting Rights Act, the Privacy Act, the 10th Amendment of the United States, and the separation of powers, among other things. All good news here on Midas Touch and on legal AF. I'm Michael Popak.

We've been waiting for it. I've been looking at my watch and my clock since Tuesday. On Tuesday, Donald Trump signed an executive order in which he declared that there'd be, as listed in this complaint, that there would be effectively a federal screening regime between the voter and the ballot box, putting the Department of Homeland Security to go get record data from the Social Security administration

about citizenship and voting, even though those two things don't go together, then use the Postal Service as some store, of Gestapo to stop ballots from being delivered to people. If you think this violates Article 1 of the Constitution about who controls federal elections, the states, or the 10th Amendment that gives power to the states about everything that's not provided for in the Constitution to the federal government, you'd be right. And now we're going to have a Massachusetts judge, hopefully do what Judge Kolar Kitelli did

just last year. You might be thinking this is deja vu all over again, or Brownhog Day. Didn't Donald Trump do this last year? Yeah, he did a version of this last year with citizenship requirements and penalizing states if they didn't use voter ID and Judge Colarquitell. He said, no, you cannot do that. And on similar grounds and similar blueprint blocked that executive order. I assume that's exactly what's going to happen here in Massachusetts. I'm so glad here, while I've got your attention, one second, we are up for the Webby Awards on two of our podcast that I produced. One of them, The Intersection, my podcast on Tuesday nights for best new

podcast in the news. And legal AF, yes, for best podcast in the news. New and old, both being considered for the Webby's. This is your chance. This is a popular voice of the people, if you will. This is the People's Choice Award. In links below, you can vote for both podcasts over the next 12 days and we'll find out of where the winner. We're currently in first place and both with your help. Let's get back to the mail-in ballot. Everybody's very concerned in our audience, as they should be, about mail-in ballots. There's been a lot of chatter about it over the last week or so. We had an oral argument at the United States Supreme Court just about a week ago

that looks like it'll be bad for mail-in ballots in the following aspect, that the Supreme Court will likely, at least the six MAGA on the Supreme Court, will find that grace periods or extensions of time to allow the Postal Service to deliver a ballot as long as the election, the ballot election is marked and stamped by election day, that those extended periods, three days, five days, ten days to still have your ballot count are somehow unconstitutional or a violation of a statute. So now you're going to have to make sure not only that you get your ballot, you're registering for your ballot, you fight through all these executive orders,

you mark your ballot, you elect who you want, you stamp it by election day. It's got to be delivered by election day, likely. That was two weeks ago. We haven't gotten the ruling yet, but I think that's what's coming by June when the term is over for the Supreme Court. Then you had Donald Trump maybe emboldened by that particular Supreme Court oral argument. He had a rough week at the Supreme Court, if you ask me. He was the first sitting president to attend an oral argument of the Supreme Court. He was the first sitting president to storm out of one when they rebuked him to his face in birthright citizenship about the 14th Amendment.

But I digress. So off of that, Donald Trump took to the Oval Office, you know, his little safe space, his little panic room. And he signed an executive order because he's getting blocked permanently, probably, at the Senate about the Save Act. Democrats are blocking it through filibuster, which would require you to show your papers, show your citizenship papers, bring your passport, bring your birth certificate, bring your great-grandmother to vouch for your citizenship before voting. That's going to go down in flames. by the Democrats. So Donald Trump wanted to sign something to say that they make good on his promise

to F with the elections. Okay, so that's a big deal. Very proud of it. And I think, I don't know how it can be challenged. I'll probably challenge it. You may find a rogue judge. You got a lot of rogue judges, very bad, bad people, very bad judges.

But that's the only way that can be changed. And hopefully, well, we don't appeal if it is, but I don't, I don't, I don't see how anybody can challenge it. I don't see how they can challenge it. And remember, it's about voter integrity. We want to have honest voting in our country. Because if you don't have honest voting,

you can't have really a nation, if you want to know the truth of the tower. I'll give that to you. Delete me makes it easy, quick, and safe to remove your personal data online at a time when surveillance and data breaches are common enough to make everyone vulnerable. Look, as someone with an active online,

online presence, privacy is really important to me. There's just too much personal information floating around online, and I don't have time to track it all down myself. Delete me. Does all the hard work of wiping you and your family's personal information from data broker websites. Delete me isn't just a one-time service. Delete me is always working for you, constantly monitoring and removing the personal information

you don't want on the internet. take control of your data and keep your private life private by signing up for Delete Me. Now at a special discount for our listeners, get 20% off your DeleteMe plan when you go to JoinDeletme.com slash LegalAF and use promo code LegalAF at checkout. The only way to get 20% off is to go to joinDeletme.com slash legal AF and enter code legalAF at checkout. One more time, join DeleteMe.com slash LegalAF code. Legal A.F. Now, let me just give a historical background here. When we put together this great United States and the big states and the small states got together and they feared a federal government

being so empowered that it would be kinglike, the way they compromised in order to come up with the Constitution and to put the states together and to appease big states like Virginia and New York and North Carolina and their fears was to say, fine. Federal elections, about the House, Senate, the presidency, states, you handle that. The feds won't handle their own elections, a separation of powers, if you will, a check and balance, if you will. And the states all said, hooray, I mean, this is my version. And they joined the union.

Okay. That's my little two-minute tutorial like schoolhouse rock. And so the states have that power. And everything that's not given to the federal government in the Constitution, was reserved to the states by way the 10th Amendment. We talk a lot about the 10th Amendment in this administration because they're constantly violating state sovereignty, state rights, which is odd for Republicans, but that's what they're doing.

So we got the new filing, which I'll put up on legal AF substack for you to read for paid membership. And what they're arguing is that they need an injunction and a declaration from this federal judge in Massachusetts hasn't been assigned it, but it will be. And I'll come back and tell you about it. and that Donald Trump's executive order that you just heard I'm talking about is ultra-varees violates the Voting Rights Act, the Privacy Act because they're using Social Security data.

You didn't give permission for people to be looking at for voting purposes, the 10th Amendment, which we just talked about. Let me read from the top of the complaint, starting on page two. This case challenges an extraordinary and abusive assertion of executive power over the administration, of federal elections, says paragraph one. The U.S. Constitution assigns authority over federal elections to the states and Congress, not the president. Yet, on March 31, in an executive order, it unilaterally imposed sweeping changes to election procedures.

This is not the first time, paragraph two, that president has unlawfully attempted to usurp power over federal elections. He did the same thing in 2025, and that was found to be unconstitutional. So is this one. It targets the judge. transmission and receipt of mail-in ballots seeking to commandeer and display state election laws by executive fiat. It directs federal agencies to develop unreliable federal citizenship verification mechanisms, apparently on the fly. Just like an Elon Musk thing, he wanted that one

grand database to put all of our information in one place. What could go wrong? Attention hackers. And that the United States Postal Service, I mean, God love them. But do you really want them in charge of policing who gets a ballot to create its own list of approved mail voters and treat certain ballots as ineligible for delivery. In effect, by the way, you can go get your mail-in ballot, but I guess you'll have to hand-carry it and skip the postal service. They then go through the Constitution. They talk about how all of this is ultra-vary's. Ultra-vary's meaning, the Latin term, meaning outside of the power, irregular. There's no express language in constitutional provisions, nor in statutes by the government, by Congress laws that allow for this.

And so this will now go up to this federal judge. It's going to be an emergency injunction setting, meaning we're going to be talking about a temporary restraining order being put in place, I think, by Monday or Tuesday could be earlier. But maybe it'll go Monday, Tuesday because we're not, We're not mailing balloting yet. So yes, there's an emergency, but doesn't have to happen like in the next hour. So they may set a briefing schedule once the judges aside, get everybody together next week for a preliminary hearing, a temporary hearing, and then issue it. And if Trump doesn't like it, he won't.

He'll take an appeal on an emergency basis to the First Circuit, which sits in Boston, Massachusetts. And if he doesn't like the result there, he'll try to lob in some sort of hand grenade into the United States Supreme Court. and see if they're going to interfere again with mail-in ballots and find that he has the power to do it. The issue on the mail-in ballots from two weeks ago was not about presidential power. It was about whether a statute defining when election day is was violated by these states creating a grace period for the receipt of mail-in ballots. Here is right at the heart of the matter.

can a president under an executive order screw with federal elections and set requirements? In the past, just last year, the answer is no. And I don't think even this Supreme Court, I don't think he can get Roberts and Amy Coney-Parrant to go along for this particular one. I may be wrong. I've been wrong before occasionally, but I don't think so. But I'm glad you're here.

We'll follow this story closely. I'm going to be bringing on the American Civil Liberties Union, who's collaborative with us over on the legal AF YouTube channel in the next day or so, one of their lawyers who's handling this case to brief our audience in full. And this is not the only case. There is going to be another case led by the Attorneys General,

the 24 Democratic Attorneys General. At least 20 of them are working around the clock right now to file their own case. Probably won't be in Massachusetts. If I had a guess, could be in, I don't think it'll be in D.C. either. Could be in Washington State. could be in the Northern District of California,

could be in New Hampshire. There's various places, Maryland, there's various places that are friendly, if you will, for this type of lawsuit. And I'm sure the lawyers for the Attorney Generals are working on that. And we'll get those lawyers to appear with us and brief our audience as well.

That's why you come to Legal A.F. and Midas Touch. So until my next report, thanks for the support for the Webby Awards. I'm Michael Popak for Legal A.F. and Midas Touch. Can't get your fill of legal A.F. Me neither. That's why we formed the legal A.F. Substack. Every time we mention something in a hot take, whether it's a court filing or a oral argument, come over to the substack. You'll find the court filing in the oral argument there, including a daily roundup that I do call, wait for it, morning A.F. What else? All the other contributors from legal A.F are there as well. We got some new reporting. We got interviews. We got ad-free versions of the podcast and hot takes. Where? Legal A.F. On Substack. Come over now to free subscribe.