The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to allow the U.S. Postal Service to enforce rules targeting mail-in voting, stymieing President Donald Trump’s efforts to restrict mail-in voting ahead of November’s midterm elections, when he will take control of Congress.
The justices rejected the Justice Department’s request to lift a ruling by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston that blocked the Postal Service from enforcing the measure amid legal challenges by states and voting rights groups. The agency adopted the measure after President Trump issued an executive order in March aimed at tightening rules for voting by mail.
“The government is unlikely to be successful in challenging the district court’s preliminary injunction on the merits,” the court said in its short, one-paragraph order.
Justice Samuel Alito dissented from Monday’s decision, along with fellow conservative Justice Clarence Thomas. No other justices publicly dissented. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority.
Trump’s fellow Republicans are locked in a fierce battle to maintain control of Congress in the midterm elections. Restricting mail-in voting would benefit Republicans, given that Democratic voters use mail-in voting disproportionately, according to various studies.
Under the rules, each state must provide the Postal Service with a list of mail-in ballot recipients and use mailing and return ballot envelopes with unique barcodes approved by the agency. In that case, the Postal Service could refuse to ship ballots that don’t comply with the new standards or that involve voters who aren’t on the list.
Critics say the plan could disrupt the delivery of thousands of legitimate ballots and cause chaos as the Nov. 3 vote approaches, given the impending plans of many states to ship mail-in ballots to voters. The administration says the new rules will prevent voter fraud, but evidence of such fraud is rare.
Judge Talwani on September 4 issued an injunction blocking the rule, saying it would likely violate the U.S. Constitution, which allows states to administer elections. He also said it would be impossible for states to comply given the rapidly approaching midterm elections.
Another federal judge, Washington, D.C.-based U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, also ruled against the rule on Sunday.
“Test your limits”
Sophia Lynn Lakin, director of the Voting Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, who represented some of the challengers to the USPS rules, welcomed Monday’s decision.
“This administration continues to test the limits of its power, as if the rules governing elections are simply suggestions to be ignored if they do not meet the president’s objectives. But the Constitution gives states and Congress the power to set the rules for federal elections, not the president or the Postal Service,” she said.
“Today is a good day for Americans who seek democracy, the rule of law, and the exercise of their constitutional right to vote,” California Governor Gavin Newsom said.
“President Trump’s attack on our democracy over the past 20 months has been nothing short of un-American,” Governor Newsom added.
Trump signed an executive order targeting mail-in voting after years of questioning its security, although he often votes by mail himself. He has falsely claimed that there was widespread fraud in U.S. elections, including his 2020 loss to former Democratic President Joe Biden.
In an emergency request on September 6, the administration asked the Supreme Court to allow implementation of “important federal policies to prevent mail-in mail from being used for voter fraud.”
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh said in a concurring statement Monday that while there is a “fair prospect” that the rule is within the Postal Service’s authority, state and local election officials do not have “sufficient time to reasonably implement the rule” before the 2026 election.
In his dissenting opinion, Justice Alito used a soccer analogy, comparing some of the challengers’ claims to a “Hail Mary pass” that is “unlikely to succeed.”
“The Postal Service has broad authority to regulate mail,” he added.
The state challenged the rules.
A coalition of mostly Democratic states and Washington, D.C., as well as a number of voting rights groups, objected to the new USPS rules.
The Boston-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit last Thursday refused to put Judge Talwani’s order on hold. The First Circuit said the rule would “probably disenfranchise millions of voters across the country, while providing minimal, if any, benefit in combating voter fraud.”
The fight over mail-in voting is part of a series of efforts by the administration to increase federal involvement in voting ahead of the midterm elections. On August 24, the Supreme Court reversed an injunction issued by Judge Talwani in June to block Trump’s executive order, which included the USPS regulations before they were finalized.
This article is from Reuters. Reported by Andrew Chan in New York. Additional reporting by John Kruzel in Washington. Edited by Will Dunham.