The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday night rejected the Trump administration’s emergency request to enforce new U.S. Postal Service rules targeting mail-in ballots ahead of the November 3 midterm elections, delivering a setback to President Donald Trump’s efforts to restrict mail voting.
In a per curiam order, the court denied the Justice Department’s plea to lift a federal judge’s injunction blocking the Postal Service from enforcing the measure while legal challenges proceed. The decision ensures that states can proceed with mail-ballot distribution without complying with the new federal requirements.
Key details of the ruling
The court’s brief order stated that the government was “unlikely to succeed on the merits” of its challenge to the lower court’s injunction. The ruling came after the Postal Service adopted the rule in response to a March executive order from Trump aimed at tightening mail-voting procedures. Under the now-blocked plan, states would have been required to:
- Provide voter lists to the Postal Service for verification before ballots could be mailed.
- Use USPS-approved envelopes with unique barcodes and high-speed scanning capabilities.
- Refuse to send ballots that did not meet the new standards or were associated with voters not on the approved lists.
Reactions from the White House and the court
President Trump criticized the decision in a series of posts on Truth Social, calling the court’s ruling a “big loss for Republicans” and accusing it of enabling “cheating by the Radical Left ‘Dumocrats’” on mail-in ballots. He also targeted three justices he appointed—Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, and Brett Kavanaugh—for joining the majority in upholding the injunction, writing that they were “not the people I interviewed to serve on the United States Supreme Court.”
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who joined the majority, wrote a concurring opinion stating that while the Postal Service likely has the authority to issue such a rule, applying it “would be arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act because election officials lacked sufficient time to implement it before the election. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the challengers lacked legal standing and that the Postal Service has broad authority over mail handling.
Election officials and voting rights groups respond
State election officials, including California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, welcomed the decision, calling it a win for election integrity and allowing states to proceed with mail-ballot distribution without disruption. Weber stated in a statement that the ruling lifted “a dark cloud hanging over” preparations for the midterms.
Voting rights advocates had opposed the Postal Service rule, arguing it could disrupt legitimate ballots and create unnecessary barriers for voters. Critics also noted that the plan was implemented weeks before the election, leaving little time for states to comply.
Background: The Postal Service rule and legal challenges
The Trump administration’s rule stemmed from an executive order signed in March, which directed the Postal Service to tighten mail-voting procedures. The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts had previously blocked the rule in a preliminary injunction, prompting the administration’s emergency appeal to the Supreme Court.
The case highlights ongoing tensions over mail-in voting, a method used by millions of voters in recent elections. Democrats have generally supported expanded mail voting, citing convenience and accessibility, while Republicans, including Trump, have raised concerns about fraud and argued for stricter controls.
What’s next?
The Supreme Court’s order does not resolve the underlying legal dispute, leaving open the possibility that the Postal Service could reintroduce similar rules in future elections if given sufficient time for implementation. Legal experts note that the court’s decision suggests skepticism toward last-minute rule changes affecting election procedures.
For now, states can proceed with mail-ballot distribution as planned, with voting already underway in several states, including Alabama, North Carolina, and Wisconsin.
Timeline of key events
- March 2026: Trump signs executive order directing Postal Service to tighten mail-voting rules.
- Late August 2026: Postal Service adopts new ballot envelope requirements with unique barcodes and scanning capabilities.
- September 14, 2026: U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issues preliminary injunction blocking the rule.
- September 16, 2026: Supreme Court denies Trump administration’s emergency request to enforce the rule for the midterms.