No. of Recommendations: 4
Without reading the entire thing, I don't know on what grounds the jurisdictional argument is being made.
The government has argued that the States don't have standing, because they aren't being affected by the Executive Order. In the majority's telling, the EO does not require the States to do anything, nor does it require them to refrain from doing anything. The EO has no legal effect on the States or their rights or any activities they will do (or not do) in preparation for the upcoming election, and therefore does not present a justiciable case or controversy.
The dissent accepted the States' arguments to the contrary, that they will have to start taking action in anticipation of possible future changes to election laws or actions taken by the administration, thus creating an actual dispute.
