The United States Postal Service (USPS) has finalized a 95-page rule that could significantly impact mail-in voting for the upcoming midterm elections. This move comes amidst a backdrop of legal challenges and intense scrutiny from both voting-rights groups and the Trump administration.
The new rule, set to take effect immediately if the government secures relief from two existing injunctions, mandates that USPS employees verify that outbound federal ballot mailings comply with new envelope, barcode, and data-reporting requirements before accepting them from election officials. This regulation is a direct response to President Donald Trump’s executive order issued on March 31, which aims to enhance the security and tracking of mail-in ballots.
Legal Challenges and Court Injunctions
Two separate court orders are currently blocking the implementation of the USPS’s new rule. On June 25 and August 11, Massachusetts U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani issued injunctions that prevent the USPS from enforcing the rule ahead of the November midterm elections.
The June Injunction: Protecting State Voting Practices
A coalition of 23 states, along with the District of Columbia, filed a lawsuit on April 3 to block Trump’s executive order, arguing that the President does not have the authority to dictate state voting practices. Judge Talwani granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs, finding two sections of the order unlawful and constitutionally invalid. The injunction bars federal agencies from implementing those sections against plaintiff states and D.C. for elections held on or before November 3. It also blocks USPS from refusing to transmit ballots based on whether voters appear on the new state-specific lists.
The August Injunction: Safeguarding Voter Rights
Voting-rights groups brought a separate lawsuit against the Trump Administration on April 2, claiming the executive order was unconstitutional and could disenfranchise eligible voters. The resulting August injunction bars USPS from implementing, enforcing, or giving effect to the executive order’s mail-voting provisions for any elections ahead of or on November 3. It also prohibits USPS from completing the specified rulemaking for those elections.
Judge Talwani emphasized that the executive order was “causing confusion and threatening both increasing chaos and an erosion of trust in our democracy.” She concluded that “the executive branch has no authority to regulate elections.” Critics argue that the Trump Administration is attempting to impose federal oversight on elections, a responsibility enshrined to states and Congress in the Constitution.
Criticism and Defense of the New Rule
Michael McNulty, the senior policy director for government-reform nonprofit Issue One, stated that the new mail-in voting rule is “an attempt to weaponize USPS as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to take over elections.” He argues that the rule would shift postal workers from neutral transporters to federal gatekeepers of states’ outbound mail ballots.
In defense of the rule, the USPS asserts that the requirements “do not amount to election administration, nor do they usurp state resources.” According to the rule, these measures “regulate the use of the mail to improve operational efficiency and support the faithful execution of federal law.“
Voting-Rights Groups Challenge the USPS Rule
A coalition of voting-rights organizations has filed an emergency motion asking the federal district court to enforce its August 11 injunction against USPS. The plaintiffs argue that issuing an immediately effective final rule, intended for possible use in November, violated the injunction. They contend that USPS could have given the rule an effective date that falls after the 2026 midterms without violating the injunction, while the “immediate” effective date could sow “chaos” and “confusion” ahead of November.
“Enforcement of the court’s preliminary injunction is necessary to hold this administration accountable for its unlawful action and make clear that voters can confidently cast their mail ballot free from federal interference this November,” said a statement on behalf of the plaintiffs, which includes the League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, and the U.S. Vote Foundation.
Postmaster General David Steiner defended the rule when it was proposed in June, stating that he “would think that states would want the information to ensure that the ballots that they think they’re sending out are the ballots that are actually getting sent out.“
The Trump Administration has asked the Supreme Court to stay the June 25 injunction while its appeal proceeds. After Talwani issued the August 11 injunction, the Administration urged the justices to address that second order as well through the pending proceeding—an approach the plaintiff states opposed. Unless the August 11 injunction is separately stayed or lifted, or the Supreme Court expressly addresses it, it continues to bar USPS from implementing its new rule for the midterm elections.
