Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Revive USPS Mail-Ballot Rules
A coalition of blue states led by California warned the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday that allowing the U.S. Postal Service to implement new mail-ballot rules for the midterm elections would cause widespread chaos and disenfranchise millions of voters. According to court filings, the Democrat-led coalition urged the high court to keep a nationwide preliminary injunction in place against the administration’s plan.
Legal Battle and Supreme Court Appeal
The emergency appeal before the Supreme Court stems from a nationwide preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston. According to the court filings, Talwani halted the plan last week after finding that its rushed implementation right before the November election threatened the voting rights of millions of U.S. citizens.
Rather than appealing to the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, the Trump administration bypassed the lower appellate court. Solicitor General D. John Sauer filed an emergency application asking the high court to lift Talwani’s order. According to the court filings, Sauer argued that the federal government would suffer serious harm from voter fraud if the rules do not take effect, stating that the injunction prevents the Postal Service from verifying that mailed envelopes comply with the required standards.
State Warnings of Midterm Chaos and Administrative Burden
In their opposition filing submitted Wednesday, California, 23 other states, and the District of Columbia told the Supreme Court that compliance with the Postal Service rules would be impossible for some jurisdictions. According to the court filings, the coalition stated that millions of voters would be unable to vote by mail or vote at all if the regulations take effect.
The Democrat-led states pointed out that several jurisdictions, including North Carolina and Wisconsin, have already begun mailing out ballots for the upcoming midterms. According to the court filings, the coalition highlighted objections from lower-ranking officials in conservative states that have not formally joined the lawsuit, noting that the lieutenant governor and other officials in Utah called the implementation an unmitigated disaster. Similar concerns were raised by officials in Florida, Ohio, Texas, and Wisconsin.
Disputed Requirements and Whistleblower Concerns
The disputed rules stem from a March executive order signed by President Donald Trump. According to the court filings, the final rule issued by the Postal Service on August 21 requires states to submit complete voter lists to the agency and adopt new ballot envelopes featuring individualized voter bar codes designed by the Postal Service. The rules mandate that the agency reject any mail ballots that fail to match those lists.
While Solicitor General Sauer described the regulations as modest envelope-design and addressee-information requirements that build on long-standing practices, the opposing states characterized the burden as herculean. According to the court filings, the states argued that ballots will not be delivered unless every voter is registered in a new, unproven online portal, and unless specific Intelligent Mail barcodes are accurately printed and tied to each voter.
Skepticism over the technical feasibility of the rules also came from inside the agency. According to the court filings, a Postal Service whistleblower recently told congressional Democrats that the online verification portal was built in a slapdash manner, calling it fundamentally flawed and warning that it risks rejecting thousands of ballots due to minor reading errors.