Trump Administration Files Fresh Emergency Bid With Supreme Court to Advance Mail Voting Restrictions

The Trump administration petitioned the Supreme Court on Sunday to permit its proposed restrictions on mail-in voting ahead of the midterm elections, establishing what is expected to be the definitive legal reckoning for the president’s effort to limit absentee ballot access in the final weeks before the election.

In an emergency application, administration lawyers urged the justices to permit new U.S. Postal Service regulations to take effect, which would alter how the agency processes mail-in ballots.

Each passing day diminishes the likelihood that the Trump administration can navigate the legal and logistical obstacles required to implement the new rules before the midterms.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, responsible for emergency applications from the region where the case originated, established a schedule indicating the court would address the matter swiftly, though not immediately.

Justice Jackson requested responses from challengers by Wednesday at 4 p.m. She did not address the administration’s plea to allow the Postal Service rules to take effect while the case is reviewed. Consequently, the administration remains blocked from enacting its plan for now.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the justices to act quickly to let the Postal Service proceed, contending the new rule “does not seize control of states’ administration of elections — it simply imposes reasonable preparation requirements for certain election-related mail.”

The emergency filing represents the latest escalation in a rapidly evolving legal battle over mail-in voting, even as states begin distributing ballots. The outcome now rests with the Supreme Court, which will have the final word on President Trump’s mail voting restrictions.

The pace and timing of a ruling remain uncertain. Unlike standard cases that unfold over months with full briefing and oral argument, emergency requests like this one are typically resolved on a compressed timeline without complete briefing or argument.

Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project, which represents voting rights organizations challenging the plan, deemed the Postal Service rule “unconstitutional.”

“It is unlawful,” she stated Sunday. “With fewer than 60 days until the November election, there is no evidence that states could comply without disenfranchising voters who depend on mail ballots.”

This latest request followed a federal judge in Boston on Friday who announced an indefinite freeze on the Postal Service plan while litigation continues through lower courts.

The Trump administration had previously filed an emergency request challenging a temporary pause imposed by the trial court judge. However, the judge extended her freeze before the justices ruled, compelling the administration to submit a new request to the Supreme Court.

Trial court Judge Indira Talwani determined that the legal challenge by Democratic-led states and voting rights organizations was likely to succeed. The groups argued the plan violated constitutional separation of powers, which assigns election authority to states and Congress, not the executive branch.

Judge Talwani wrote that Trump administration lawyers sought to “avoid” the separation of powers issue by “denying that the final rule is an election rule.” She added: “This denial rings hollow.”

She also rejected the administration’s argument that the Postal Service acted under congressional authority, writing that “throughout its body of election legislation, Congress has never delegated its Elections Clause power to the USPS.”

She further stated the Postal Service rule “clashes with Congress’s statutory scheme, and is unconstitutional where it intrudes not only on Congress’s elections clause powers but also that power left to the states.”

Mr. Sauer countered Judge Talwani’s assessment in his brief to the justices, asserting the Postal Service plan fell within the agency’s authority to adopt rules “as may be necessary in the execution of its functions” and likened mail-in ballot rules to Postal Service “preparation requirements for the mailing of cremated remains and replica explosives.”

Source link