Supreme Court Refuses to Let Postal Service Enforce Mail-Ballot Rule

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to allow the U.S. Postal Service to enforce a rule targeting mail-in ballots, handing a setback to President Donald Trump's push to tighten voting by mail before November's midterm elections, which will decide control of Congress.

The justices turned down a Justice Department request to lift a ruling by Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani that barred the agency from enforcing the measure while lawsuits by states and voting-rights groups move forward. The Postal Service adopted the rule after Trump issued a March executive order aimed at tightening mail-voting rules.

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented, writing that the administration "is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal."

A second federal judge, Washington, D.C.-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, also ruled against the rule on Sunday. Nichols, granting a request from the Democratic Party and groups including the NAACP, found that the measure could make it harder for some people to vote by mail and exceeded the Postal Service's authority. "No statute grants the Postal Service the power to issue key parts of the rule," he wrote.

Under the rule, states would have to give the Postal Service lists of mail-ballot recipients and use agency-approved outbound and return envelopes with unique barcodes. The agency could then refuse to send ballots that do not meet the new standards or that are tied to voters not on the lists.

Critics say the plan could disrupt delivery of thousands of legitimate ballots as the November 3 vote nears, when many states plan to send mail ballots to eligible voters. The administration says the rule would prevent voter fraud, though evidence of such fraud is rare.

Trump signed the executive order after years of questioning mail-ballot security, even though he often votes by mail himself. He has made false claims of widespread fraud in U.S. elections, including his 2020 loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

In a September 6 emergency request, the administration urged the Supreme Court to let it implement an "important federal policy to protect the mails from being used to commit voter fraud."

A coalition of mostly Democratic-governed states, along with Washington, D.C., and several voting-rights groups, challenged the rule. Talwani imposed an injunction on September 4, finding the rule likely violated the Constitution, under which states administer elections, and that compliance would be impossible so close to the midterms.

The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals refused last Thursday to pause Talwani's order, saying the rule "will likely result in the disenfranchisement of millions of voters across the country while providing minimal — if any — gains in combating voter fraud."

All 50 states permit some form of mail-in voting. Twenty-nine allow voters to request a mail ballot without giving a reason, and eight hold elections entirely by mail.

The dispute is part of a broader administration effort to expand federal involvement in voting before the midterms. On August 24, the Supreme Court lifted an earlier June injunction by Talwani that had blocked Trump's executive order, including the USPS rule before it was finalized.