WASHINGTON — A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's new mail-ballot rules just as the first states begin sending out ballots for November's midterms, setting up a third emergency trip to the Supreme Court in six weeks over an executive order that has become one of the most contested pieces of election law this cycle.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani on Friday granted a preliminary injunction barring the U.S. Postal Service from requiring states to comply with new envelope-design and portal-registration rules, replacing a two-week temporary restraining order she had issued Aug. 27. The rules stem from a March 31 executive order, "Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections," which also directs USPS to withhold delivery of ballots to voters not on state-approved lists and requires states to upload voter data into a new federal portal before mailing ballots at all, according to SCOTUSblog.
"Immediate implementation of the Final Rule issued less than seventy days before the November 2026 election threatens disenfranchisement of millions of United States citizens who seek to vote by mail."
Judge Indira Talwani
Talwani found the government had presented no evidence of fraudulent mail voting to justify the compressed timeline, and noted many states had already ordered ballots and locked in printing before the rule was finalized.
Third Trip to the Justices
The underlying case, U.S. Postal Service v. California, has already reached the Supreme Court once: in late August, the justices voted 6-3 to let the executive order take effect, ruling that the states' challenge was premature. The administration is now asking the court to pause Talwani's new injunction as well, with Solicitor General D. John Sauer arguing the rule imposes only "modest requirements" and that blocking it risks "serious irreparable harm," according to NBC News. Challenger states must respond by 10 a.m. Tuesday.
The stakes are immediate: North Carolina and Alabama began mailing ballots as early as Sept. 4, and election officials in several states say they face an all-but-impossible compliance timeline for a rule finalized less than 10 weeks before Election Day.
Voting-rights advocates cast the injunction as vindication after weeks of legal whiplash between lower courts and the justices; administration officials maintain the rule is a narrow anti-fraud measure. With a response due within 48 hours, the Supreme Court could act on the emergency application before the week is out, a decision that will determine whether the disputed rules apply to millions of ballots already moving through the mail system for November.
