This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here.

Welcome to The Logoff: President Donald Trump is purging a federal elections commission. 

What’s happening? This is not the Federal Election Commission being purged, but rather the Election Assistance Commission, a bipartisan agency designed to make elections run more smoothly. The four-member commission was already down to three members before yesterday; then, Trump removed its two Democratic members while the remaining Republican member resigned.

What does the EAC do? In the EAC’s own words, its goal is to “help election officials improve the administration of elections and help Americans participate in the voting process.” Broadly speaking, that means things like certifying voting systems, providing information to state election administrators, and disbursing election security grants.

As Just Security explains, the EAC can still follow through on most of its tasks without Senate-confirmed commissioners in place — but it can’t adopt new policies or update existing ones to respond to new needs. 

What’s the context? The dismantling of EAC leadership is a direct consequence of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. Slaughter, where it ruled that the president has the power to remove appointees at ostensibly independent federal agencies on a whim (with one big Federal Reserve-shaped exception). 

As my colleagues Zack Beauchamp and Ian Millhiser wrote at the time, the decision was a big boost to Trump’s power and created a serious threat of politicization of government. 

What’s the big picture? US elections are administered at the state level, which limits how much Trump can interfere ahead of the midterms (especially with Congress rebuffing his entreaties to pass the SAVE America Act, which would create new ID restrictions on voting). Removing the EAC’s leadership won’t cause an immediate crisis — but it does remove one more support for state election workers already suffering from burnout, threats, and harassment.

And with that, it’s time to log off…

Hi readers, a quick note from me before we log off today: I’ll be out for the next two weeks on vacation, leaving the Logoff in the extremely capable hands of my Vox colleagues. I hope you enjoy the change of pace, and I’ll see you on July 27. 

Now, before I go: A fun just-trust-me link from the journalist Hamilton Nolan about exploring the unknown.

Plus, a World Cup thing: Norway and England play tomorrow for a spot in the World Cup semifinal. Here’s a great bit of pre-match reading about Erling Haaland, Norway’s star striker.

Thanks for reading and have a great weekend!

This story appeared in The Logoff, a daily newsletter that helps you stay informed about the Trump administration without letting political news take over your life. Subscribe here.

Welcome to The Logoff: Is the US-Iran deal “over”?  

What’s happening? The US launched a second consecutive day of strikes against Iran on Wednesday, deepening a breach in the three-week-old “memorandum of understanding” between the two countries. 

The immediate incident began on Monday after Iran attacked multiple ships in the Strait of Hormuz. The US struck Iran on Tuesday, and Iran responded with strikes of its own in neighboring Kuwait and Bahrain, which are both home to US military installations.

The US also reimposed sanctions on Iranian oil on Tuesday, restricting what had been a new income stream for the regime.

When asked about the ceasefire on Wednesday, President Donald Trump, who is currently at a NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, said, “I think it’s over. I don’t want to deal with them anymore. They’re scum.”

What’s the context? As my colleague Josh Keating wrote last month, the end of the Iran war has been greatly exaggerated from the jump. This isn’t even the first time the US has attacked Iranian targets since the two sides reached a “memorandum of understanding” in mid-June, which laid out a 60-day pathway toward a more permanent deal (at least in theory).

Other problems also abound, including the status of the Strait, the outstanding question of Iran’s nuclear program, and the Israel-Lebanon conflict.

So what now? It’s hard to say. Violence has broken out and receded at other points during the ceasefire, and Trump’s comments can be an unreliable indicator of where things are headed. But the strikes are once again grinding traffic through the Strait to a halt, according to CNN, and oil prices are rising. 

If that continues, Trump could also begin to lose ground on gas prices, which had been falling following the ceasefire agreement — and with the midterms quickly approaching and voters broadly unhappy about the state of the economy, he doesn’t have much time left.

Speaking of the midterms: The road to control of the US Senate may well run through Maine, where Democratic nominee Graham Platner is facing serious new allegations that are likely to end his campaign. On a special episode of his podcast America, Actually, my colleague Astead Herndon explains why the left ignored Platner’s red flags in the first place.

And with that, it’s time to log off…

Here’s a Logoff piece if I’ve ever seen one: The moral case for being less online, featuring some fun history about Luddism (as always, it’s a gift link).

Plus, from the World Cup: No games today. But don’t miss the Vox video team on how soccer players train for chaos.  

Thanks for reading, have a great evening, and we’ll see you back here tomorrow!