Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
The Trump administration has again asked the Supreme Court to temporarily allow the U.S. Postal Service to enforce new requirements for mail-in ballots, escalating a legal fight over federal authority over election mail less than two months before the November midterm elections.
The administration filed its latest emergency application Sunday, Sept. 6, after U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a preliminary injunction on Sept. 4 blocking enforcement of the USPS rule. The Supreme Court docket shows that the administration withdrew an earlier stay application filed Sept. 3 and replaced it with the new request. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ordered responses by 4 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 9.
The dispute centers on a Trump administration effort to impose new federal requirements on mail-in ballots sent through the Postal Service. The rule would require states to provide USPS with information about intended recipients, including names, addresses and barcode information, before certain election-related mail is processed.
The administration argues the rule does not take control of elections away from states and instead establishes what it describes as limited preparation requirements for election mail.
Opponents argue the requirements could interfere with state-administered voting systems and create new barriers for voters who use mail ballots.
Judge says rule likely unlawful
Talwani has repeatedly questioned the federal government’s authority to impose the requirements.
In an Aug. 31 order, she wrote that the court had found it likely that USPS lacked authority to issue the rule and that the regulation was likely unconstitutional and contrary to law. She also cited the timing of the regulation, noting that it was issued less than 70 days before the Nov. 3 election.
In her earlier August ruling, Talwani described President Donald Trump’s March executive order as directing USPS to refuse to transmit certain mail ballots that failed new federal requirements or were sent to individuals whose names did not appear on lists provided to the Postal Service.
The Supreme Court previously addressed the broader dispute in August. In a ruling involving Trump’s executive order, the court’s majority allowed litigation over the order to continue while addressing procedural issues. Justice Sonia Sotomayor and other justices raised concerns about federal control over election administration in the case.
Administration says states would retain control
In its latest filing, the administration maintains that states would continue determining who is eligible to vote and who may vote by mail.
The government argues that the Postal Service’s requirements concern the preparation and identification of election mail rather than the substance of ballots, voting deadlines or the counting of votes.
That position is disputed by challengers, who argue that allowing USPS to withhold or reject certain ballot mail could affect whether eligible voters receive or successfully return their ballots.
The legal dispute therefore raises questions about how far the federal government and USPS can go in regulating election-related mail without intruding on states’ traditional authority over election administration.
Election timing adds urgency
The case has taken on added urgency as states begin preparing and sending mail ballots for the midterm elections.
Talwani has cited the proximity of the election in evaluating whether the existing procedures should remain in place while the litigation proceeds. Her court has emphasized that changing election procedures close to an election can create uncertainty for election officials and voters.
The Supreme Court’s handling of the new emergency application could determine whether USPS can enforce the disputed requirements while the underlying legal challenges continue.
For now, the rule remains blocked by Talwani’s preliminary injunction. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the administration’s latest request.
