The US Supreme Court has rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to introduce sweeping new restrictions on postal voting before November’s midterm elections, leaving in place a lower-court order that blocks the changes.
The decision means the US Postal Service (USPS) cannot implement new requirements governing mail-in ballots for the 2026 elections, delivering a significant setback to President Donald Trump’s efforts to overhaul postal voting.
Trump signed an executive order in March directing USPS to deliver ballots only to voters appearing on approved citizen lists. The plan also called for unique tracking barcodes on ballot envelopes and required state and local election authorities to provide information about mail-ballot voters through an online portal.
The administration argued the measures were necessary to strengthen election security and combat illegal voting.
However, Democratic-led states and election officials challenged the changes, arguing they intruded on states’ constitutional authority to administer elections and risked preventing eligible Americans from receiving their ballots.
Kavanaugh says changes are too late for 2026 election
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the decision to keep the restrictions blocked but indicated that the administration could ultimately prevail on some of the underlying legal questions.
Kavanaugh said there was “at least a fair prospect” that the Postal Service possessed statutory authority to introduce its final rule.
However, he concluded that applying the changes to the 2026 midterm elections would be “arbitrary and capricious”, particularly with voting preparations already well underway.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, arguing that the legal challenge was unlikely to succeed in the long term and emphasising USPS’s broad authority to regulate the mail.
The ruling therefore does not permanently invalidate the administration’s proposals. Litigation over whether USPS can introduce such requirements in future elections is expected to continue.
States warned of election disruption
Election officials from 24 Democratic-led states and Washington DC warned that introducing the requirements so close to November could cause widespread confusion and potentially disenfranchise voters.
Some Republican election officials raised similar practical concerns despite supporting stronger election-security measures.
Officials said ballots and envelopes had already been printed in some states, while others had begun sending postal ballots to voters. Implementing an entirely new system at this stage could have required election authorities to redesign materials, retrain workers and alter established procedures.
The potential impact is particularly significant in states such as Colorado, Oregon and Washington, where elections rely heavily or almost entirely on voting by mail.
About 30% of voters cast their ballots by post during the 2024 general election.
Lower courts repeatedly blocked Trump order
The latest Supreme Court decision follows several defeats for the administration in lower courts.
US District Judge Indira Talwani issued an injunction on September 4 preventing the new USPS requirements from taking effect, concluding that implementing them shortly before the midterms could disenfranchise voters.
A federal appeals court subsequently refused to suspend Talwani’s injunction, while another federal judge ruled against the administration’s order on Sunday.
The Supreme Court has now allowed the injunction to remain in place.
Campaign Legal Center president Trevor Potter welcomed the decision, saying it prevented USPS from “sowing chaos in our elections.”
Trump continues push against postal voting
Trump has long criticised mail-in voting and has repeatedly claimed it is particularly vulnerable to fraud, despite a lack of evidence of widespread fraud sufficient to alter the outcome of recent US presidential elections.
The president himself has previously voted by mail.
Monday’s ruling is also the second significant Supreme Court setback for Trump over postal ballots this year.
In June, the justices rejected an administration effort to prevent states from counting mail ballots received after election day when those ballots had been legally cast and postmarked by the required deadline.
For the upcoming midterms, Monday’s decision means states can continue operating their existing mail-voting systems without having to implement the Trump administration’s new USPS requirements.
The broader legal battle, however, remains unresolved and could determine whether similar restrictions can be introduced for future US elections.
Discover more from Niyi Daram
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
