Federal Judge AGAIN Blocks USPS Plan to Restrict Mail-In Voting

A federal judge has once again temporarily halted a plan by the U.S. Postal Service to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting, a move put in place following a directive from President Trump.

Federal District Judge Indira Talwani issued the order after the agency formalized its plan late on Friday. She previously cleared the Postal Service to proceed, but concluded that the new rules appeared to exceed the agency’s legal authority and risked causing significant disruption fewer than 70 days before the election.

In her ruling, the judge stated that a group of Democratic-led states that sued would “face irreparable harm where they are required to comply with a likely unconstitutional regulation for which compliance is practically impossible as to the 2026 midterm elections, now little more than two months away.”

“A number of plaintiff states have already ordered their mail ballots, and some are required by state law to send them to eligible voters as early as next week,” she further explained.

Talwani noted that while the Supreme Court had previously “admonished” her that no court action was premature since the administration had not started implementing its plans, the situation had changed since the step the agency took to formalize its strategy.

This ruling represents the third judicial decision on the matter within a week, creating a rapid and potentially confusing legal situation for voters. However, each delay reduces the administration’s ability to clear the legal obstacles necessary to implement its complex mail-in ballot plan before November. She ordered the rule blocked for 14 days, with a hearing on its legality already scheduled for September 3rd.

In her analysis, the judge explained that the immediate and sudden effect of the new rule posed a “significant risk” of disenfranchising voters, as identified by the voting rights organizations that also filed suit alongside the states.

She detailed a list of new requirements state election officials would need to meet, including obtaining the Postal Service’s approval for new envelope designs and submitting voter information into an online portal managed by the agency.

“Where a state or local election official does not obtain envelope and return envelope design approval, or does not upload voter information, or does not include unique intelligent mail bar codes on ballot envelopes, the U.S.P.S. will not mail ballots to voters,” she concluded.

Originally, President Trump issued an executive order in March that required the Department of Homeland Security to produce state-by-state citizenship lists for state officials. The order also urged states to provide their own voter registry data to the U.S. Postal Service.

Numerous lawsuits were subsequently filed challenging the directive, arguing that Congress and state governments—setting ballots, not the executive branch—set election rules. The plaintiffs also contended that no federal law grants the Postal Service the power to establish such election-related regulations.

On Monday, the Supreme Court determined that one lawsuit, initiated by the Democratic-led states, was premature because the administration had not yet started executing its proposals.

However, late on Friday, just before the high court’s ruling, the Postal Service officially published a new plan to meet the requirements of the executive order. According to this plan, the service would not deliver mail ballots in states that fail to share their voter data and would only process ballots meeting specific criteria.

Legal representatives for the Trump administration and the plaintiffs are continuing to dispute a central question: whether the Postal Service’s plan constitutes the agency taking on an unapproved role of verifying voters and potentially rejecting ballots in the upcoming midterm election.

In a formal filing on Thursday, the Postal Service denied that its proposal gave them the authority to second-guess state decisions on voter eligibility.

“U.S.P.S. will not scrutinize those decisions or alter that information in any way — instead leaving it entirely up to the states to accurately and lawfully identify its residents who are eligible to vote by mail,” the filing stated. “The Postal Service will not determine voter eligibility, ballot content, mailing or receipt deadlines, or ballot-counting procedures.”

Instead, the agency characterized the changes as minor improvements to streamline operations, such as requiring voters to pre-submit their addresses for better processing. It claimed the adjustments were made “as a matter of the Postal Service’s own judgment,” arguing it is legally empowered to create mail regulations under congressional statutes.

A representative for the Postal Service did not immediately provide a response to a request for commentary.

The challengers counter that the Postal Service rule represents an unconstitutional breach of separation of powers, allowing the executive branch to improperly interfere in electoral matters. They argue that federal law provides no basis for this action, asserting that the Trump administration’s moves are designed to create voter confusion and lead to disenfranchisement.

The agency has indicated that it would not attempt to implement the new requirements for the 2026 elections unless explicitly permitted by the courts.

A collection of legal actions brought by multiple groups in Massachusetts and the District of Columbia are contesting President Trump’s efforts to undermine and create barriers for mail-in voting. These lawsuits focus on both the executive order and the Postal Service’s rule, challenging their application for both the current year and future elections.

Source link