# Supreme Court faces mail voting and environmental cases

> Election law and environmental experts break down what's next for voting access and conservation at SCOTUS.
- Title: Supreme Court faces mail voting and environmental cases
- Summary: Election law and environmental experts break down what's next for voting access and conservation at SCOTUS. Vote in person if you can, and the Supreme…
- Keywords: supreme court, mail-in voting, election law, trump administration, environmental law, air force, guam, richard hasen, sam sankar, earthjustice, voting access, election security
- Source: Slate Magazine — https://slate.com/podcasts/amicus/2026/09/mail-ballots-and-the-midterms-what-to-expect?via=rss
- Published: 2026-09-19T07:00:00+00:00
- Read time: 1 min
- Topics: supreme court, mail-in voting, election law, trump administration, environmental law, air force, guam, richard hasen, sam sankar, earthjustice, voting access, election security
## Mail voting goes to court again
Trump's executive order on mail-in voting has reached the Supreme Court three times. Election law expert Richard Hasen discusses what the latest ruling means for midterm voters.
## Voters should cast ballots in person
With mail voting in flux, election law expert Richard Hasen's advice to listeners is straightforward: vote in person if you can to avoid uncertainty.

> get out there and vote in-person
## SCOTUS skeptical on environment
The Supreme Court has a longstanding pattern of skepticism toward environmental protection. But Sam Sankar of Earthjustice says this doesn't necessarily doom conservation cases.
## Air Force bombing case heads to court
One upcoming environmental case involves whether the Air Force can continue explosives testing over a historic beach in Guam. The case kicks off the Supreme Court term in weeks.
## Environmental advocates stay optimistic
Despite the Court's track record, Sam Sankar says the Supreme Court's skepticism toward the environment doesn't make him as pessimistic as one might expect.
## Key takeaway

Vote in person if you can, and the Supreme Court's skepticism toward environmental protection doesn't guarantee defeat for conservation advocates.