Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
Trump's administration defends new USPS ballot-mail requirements as anti-fraud controls. Read the rule, challenges to its authority and the Supreme Court's September 14 decision leaving a temporary block in place.
BackgroundWho runs U.S. elections?
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
The conduct examined is implementing and enforcing the mandatory USPS ballot-mail requirements for elections on or before November 3, 2026. Support for a later or different postal rule is a separate question. The final rule excludes return ballot mail from the outgoing verification process and says USPS does not determine voter eligibility. Its 90-day pre-mailing notice is optional. The September 14 Supreme Court decision denied emergency relief from the preliminary injunction; the broader legal challenge remains distinct from this election’s rollout.
Background: Who runs U.S. elections?
People in this case
Donald TrumpDirectly involved
Timeline
17 timeline entries on this page. Dates: March 31, 2026 to October 29, 2026
March 2026
Trump issues federal-election executive order
Source release
Trump directs federal citizenship-verification measures and USPS ballot-mail controls, initiating the policy later implemented through the postal rule.
[01]The White House
Presidential directive underlying the later USPS rule. Its broader citizenship-verification language must be distinguished from the final postal rule.
Executive Order 14399: Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections · The White HouseSections 1 and 3
June 2026
USPS publishes its proposed federal ballot-mail rule
Source release
USPS proposed mandatory envelope standards, voter-list submissions and screening requirements for federal ballot mail.
[02]USPS proposed rule for federal ballot mail
USPS proposed mandatory envelope standards, voter-list submissions and screening requirements for federal ballot mail.
USPS proposed rule for federal ballot mailProposed rule, sections 24.3-24.5Forty-seven senators demand withdrawal of the proposed USPS rule
Reaction
Forty-seven senators sent USPS leaders a joint letter opposing the proposed ballot-mail restrictions and demanding their withdrawal.
[03]Forty-seven senators' June 23 letter on ballot-mail restrictions
Forty-seven senators sent USPS leaders a joint letter opposing the proposed ballot-mail restrictions and demanding their withdrawal.
Forty-seven senators' June 23 letter on ballot-mail restrictionsJune 23 letter, opening and signatories
July 2026
Thirteen attorneys general support the proposed USPS rule
Claim
An Alabama-led coalition submits a comment letter supporting the proposed ballot-mail requirements as an election-integrity measure.
[04]Alabama-led attorneys general support proposed USPS ballot-mail requirements
Thirteen attorneys general support the proposed rule as an election-integrity measure. This predates the final rule and is background, not a new September response.
Alabama-led attorneys general support proposed USPS ballot-mail requirementsJuly 2 comment letter; proposed-rule support and signatories
August 2026
USPS final rule takes effect
Source release
The final rule takes effect August 21 and is published in the Federal Register August 26. It mandates envelope standards, portal registration and enrollment, and outgoing-mail verification.
[05]United States Postal Service
Final rule effective August 21 and published August 26. It requires ballot-envelope standards, portal registration and voter enrollment, and verification of outgoing ballot mail; return ballot mail is excluded from the verification process. USPS says it does not determine voter eligibility.
USPS final rule: Ballot Mail for Federal Elections · United States Postal Service91 FR 54966–54992; DMM 705.24.3–24.6Fontes submits sworn evidence against the USPS ballot-mail requirements
Source release
Fontes's declaration was filed in the federal challenge to the USPS rule. He warned that implementing its voter-enrollment and envelope requirements before November would impose costs and risk preventing eligible Arizona voters from receiving ballots.
[06]Declaration of Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes
Fontes submitted sworn evidence opposing the USPS ballot-mail requirements for the November 2026 election.
Declaration of Arizona Secretary of State Adrian FontesCase 1:26-cv-13917-IT, Document 4-5; paragraphs 17-21, pages 9-12; executed August 25 on page 30, filed August 26.
September 2026
District court blocks mandatory provisions for the November election
Judge Indira Talwani grants preliminary relief against specified mandatory ballot-mail provisions for elections on or before November 3. Voluntary compliance is not barred, and later elections remain outside this temporary block.
[07]District-court preliminary injunction against mandatory USPS ballot-mail provisions
Official Supreme Court-hosted copy of the 49-page district order attached to a September 4 letter. Mandatory provisions are blocked for elections on or before November 3; voluntary compliance is not barred. The hosting docket 26A297 is the earlier application, not the later operative stay docket.
District-court preliminary injunction against mandatory USPS ballot-mail provisionsAttached district order, Doc.156, No.1:26-cv-13917-IT; printed pp.45–49 (PDF pp.47–51)Government asks Supreme Court to allow enforcement
Claim
The government files its operative stay application, arguing for immediate enforcement while the preliminary injunction is appealed. This application replaces the earlier filing numbered 26A297.
[08]United States Postal Service
Government litigation position seeking immediate relief from the preliminary injunction. It argues that the requirements fall within postal powers and protect against fraudulent use of the mail.
USPS v. California: Government application for a stay, No. 26A305 · United States Postal ServicePrinted p.13 (PDF p.18); application’s argument and requested relief[09]Supreme Court of the United States
Operative Supreme Court docket. The earlier application numbered 26A297 was withdrawn and replaced; the filings and order should not be assigned to that superseded application.
Supreme Court docket No. 26A305: USPS v. California · Supreme Court of the United StatesSeptember 6 application, September 9 responses and September 14 orderStates and election officials file Supreme Court responses
Source release
Respondent states dispute USPS’s authority and implementation timetable. Current and former election officials file an amicus brief opposing immediate rollout; current officials participate in their individual capacities.
[10]California and other states: Opposition to USPS stay application, No. 26A305
Respondent states dispute USPS’s authority and warn that immediate compliance would disrupt election administration. Statements quoted from election officials remain attributed to those officials.
California and other states: Opposition to USPS stay application, No. 26A305Introduction; statutory-authority and implementation sections[11]Current and former election officials: Amicus brief in USPS v. California
Brief formally supports neither party but opposes immediate implementation before the November election. Current officials participate in their individual capacities, not on behalf of their jurisdictions.
Current and former election officials: Amicus brief in USPS v. CaliforniaArgument on 2026 implementation; appendix listing amici[09]Supreme Court of the United States
Operative Supreme Court docket. The earlier application numbered 26A297 was withdrawn and replaced; the filings and order should not be assigned to that superseded application.
Supreme Court docket No. 26A305: USPS v. California · Supreme Court of the United StatesSeptember 6 application, September 9 responses and September 14 orderFirst Circuit denies stays
The First Circuit denies requests to stay the preliminary injunction, leaving the temporary election-specific restrictions on enforcement in place.
[12]First Circuit order denying stays of the USPS ballot-mail injunction
Appellate order denying stays of preliminary relief. It precedes the Supreme Court’s September 14 denial.
First Circuit order denying stays of the USPS ballot-mail injunctionOrder in No.26-2029 and consolidated appealsA second federal judge blocks the USPS ballot-mail rule
Judge Carl J. Nichols of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted preliminary injunctions against the rule in consolidated cases brought by the DSCC, LULAC and NAACP plaintiffs, holding that its key portions exceeded the Postal Service’s statutory authority. This is separate from the Massachusetts injunction then before the Supreme Court. Nichols had refused an injunction in May as premature; the plaintiffs refiled after the final rule issued on August 21.
[13]DSCC v. Trump: memorandum opinion granting preliminary injunctions against the USPS ballot-mail rule
Source excerpt
“The key portions of the Rule exceed any conception of the outer bounds of these authorities.”
The signed 24-page opinion of Judge Carl J. Nichols, in consolidated actions DSCC v. Trump (26-cv-01114) and League of United Latin American Citizens v. Executive Office of the President (26-cv-01132), with NAACP plaintiffs also joined. It is a second, separate injunction from the Massachusetts case already recorded in this case. The court granted the LULAC and NAACP motions in full and the DSCC motion in part.
DSCC v. Trump: memorandum opinion granting preliminary injunctions against the USPS ballot-mail ruleStatutory-authority analysis at p.15; public-interest analysis at p.20; conclusion and date line at p.24.Supreme Court denies emergency stay
The Court leaves the November injunction in place. Kavanaugh concurs on 2026 timing; Alito dissents with Thomas joining. The order resolves emergency relief, rather than every underlying legal issue.
[14]Supreme Court of the United States
The Court denies a stay of the preliminary injunction. Kavanaugh objects to applying the rule in 2026; Alito would grant the stay and Thomas joins him. This is emergency relief, not final disposition of every challenge to the executive order.
Supreme Court stay denial, Kavanaugh concurrence and Alito dissent: USPS v. California · Supreme Court of the United StatesPDF p.1: concurrence; pp.2–9: dissent and Thomas’s express joinder[09]Supreme Court of the United States
Operative Supreme Court docket. The earlier application numbered 26A297 was withdrawn and replaced; the filings and order should not be assigned to that superseded application.
Supreme Court docket No. 26A305: USPS v. California · Supreme Court of the United StatesSeptember 6 application, September 9 responses and September 14 orderUSPS halts work on the ballot portal and tells staff the rules will not be enforced in 2026
Postmaster General David Steiner tells the Associated Press that work on the Federal Ballot Mail Portal has stopped because of the injunction, having planned to unveil it around September 15. An internal memo to all postal employees dated September 16, obtained by the AP, states the agency will “not be enforcing any of these new rules in the 2026 federal election” and that for Election Mail it is “business as usual.” No Federal Register action withdrawing, delaying or amending the rule has been taken.
[15]AP: “Work has stopped on system that was key to Trump effort to limit mail voting, USPS chief says”
Source excerpt
“There’s an injunction so we’re not doing anything,” postmaster general David Steiner told The Associated Press in an interview. ... Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, a memo sent to all postal service employees Wednesday and obtained by the AP said the agency will “not be enforcing any of these new rules in the 2026 federal election.”
First on-record remarks by Postmaster General David Steiner on the ballot-mail rule. He says work on the Federal Ballot Mail Portal has stopped, that he had planned to unveil it around September 15, and that he approached the rule “from the execution side” rather than deciding its merits. The article also quotes an internal USPS memo to all employees, dated Wednesday September 16, stating the agency will not enforce the rules in the 2026 federal election. The memo itself is not public and exists here only as AP-quoted material. This is the PBS NewsHour syndication of the AP story; the AP original is at apnews.com/article/trump-mail-ballot-us-postal-service-995f98147fbb49fb71696be824abff95.
AP: “Work has stopped on system that was key to Trump effort to limit mail voting, USPS chief says”Paragraphs carrying Postmaster General Steiner’s interview remarks and the quoted USPS employee memo.ProPublica reports the White House first floated a certified-mail-only plan and left postal officials out of drafting
Source release
ProPublica reported on September 28, citing several people knowledgeable about the discussions, that the White House initially proposed requiring all ballots to be delivered by certified mail, an idea abandoned after Postal Service officials objected that it could not be carried out. It reported that postal officials were then left out of key conversations before the March executive order, that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick served in "an advisory and coordination capacity" in drafting it, as a Commerce Department spokesperson confirmed, and that some members of the Postal Service Board of Governors stayed silent while counting on the courts to block the measure. White House spokesperson Lauren Bis denied any improper interference with the Postal Service.
[16]The Untold Origins of Trump's Plan to Sharply Restrict Mail-In Voting (ProPublica, September 28, 2026)
Source excerpt
the administration initially floated an idea that would have virtually shut down mail voting: requiring all ballots to be delivered exclusively through certified mail
ProPublica reports, citing several people knowledgeable about the discussions, that the White House first proposed requiring all ballots to be sent by certified mail before abandoning the idea over Postal Service objections, that postal officials were left out of later drafting, and that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick served in an advisory and coordination role. It quotes an emailed statement from White House spokesperson Lauren Bis defending the order, a Commerce Department spokesperson, the Postal Service's referral to an earlier statement by Postmaster General David Steiner, and an interview with American Postal Workers Union president Jonathan Smith.
The Untold Origins of Trump's Plan to Sharply Restrict Mail-In Voting (ProPublica, September 28, 2026)Paragraphs 2-3, 11-15, 17-18 and 27-35
October 2026
Trump says Republicans can vote by mail "because we seem to have no choice"
Reaction
Asked on the White House South Lawn why he was telling Republicans to vote by mail after calling it fraudulent, President Trump said he would prefer in-person voting but "they can vote by mail if they want, because we seem to have no choice". He also said there is "a lot of cheating in vote by mail", which ABC News reported he did not support with evidence. In an October 3 video he had urged supporters to "vote by mail or vote in person on Election Day".
[17]ABC News
Source excerpt
"No, vote by mail or vote in person. I'd rather have a vote in person. But they can vote by mail if they want, because we seem to have no choice," Trump said
ABC News report on President Trump's remarks about mail voting before he left for a rally in Nebraska on October 5.
Trump sows doubt about mail-in voting while encouraging it, as midterms approach · ABC NewsTrump's October 5 remarks to reporters on the White House South Lawn; October 3 videoVotebeat reports Pennsylvania Democrats' mail-ballot requests are down from 2022
Votebeat, reporting with Spotlight PA, found that as of October 19 mail-ballot requests from Pennsylvania Democrats were down 14% from the same point in 2022, while Republican requests were up 11%. MIT political scientist Charles Stewart told Votebeat the data cannot show whether the administration's mail-voting order caused the change.
[18]Votebeat
Source excerpt
As of Oct. 19, mail ballot requests from Democrats are down 14% from the equivalent point in the 2022 election.
Votebeat's report, produced in partnership with Spotlight PA, on Pennsylvania mail-ballot requests and returns by party.
Mail voting is down so far among Pennsylvania Democrats. Is Trump to blame? · VotebeatParagraphs on mail-ballot request data as of October 19Votebeat finds more early voters casting ballots in person instead of by mail
A Votebeat analysis published October 29 found early in-person voting up an average of 35% from 2022 in North Carolina, Georgia and Wisconsin, while voting by mail and drop box fell about 35%. In North Carolina, Democratic mail-ballot requests were down 41% from 2022 as of mid-October. Votebeat said the causes are not entirely clear; election scholars it interviewed pointed to Trump's attacks on mail voting, falling confidence in the Postal Service and the end of pandemic-era voting habits. HuffPost reported the same day that Democrats in several states were voting early in person in larger numbers and by mail less.
[19]Votebeat
Source excerpt
Clear examples of the shift are North Carolina, Georgia, and Wisconsin, where, on average, early in-person voting is up 35% compared with 2022 and voting by mail and drop box is down about 35%.
Votebeat says the causes of the shift are not entirely clear. Election scholars it interviewed point to Trump's attacks on mail voting, falling confidence in the Postal Service and the end of pandemic-era voting habits.
After Trump attacks on voting by mail, a growing number of Americans are instead casting ballots in person · VotebeatVotebeat analysis of state early-voting data in North Carolina, Georgia and Wisconsin, with Pew Research polling and interviews with election scholars[20]HuffPost
Source excerpt
Among Democrats, mail voting is down and early in-person voting is up, a notable shift from other post-COVID elections.
HuffPost says it is not immediately clear what caused the change. The article cites Democratic officials and organizers who say some voters distrust the mail after the administration's effort to restrict mail voting.
New Voting Habits Emerge As Democrats Surge In The Early Vote · HuffPostHuffPost report on early in-person voting by Democrats in several states, with interviews with Democratic officials and organizers
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
Mandatory USPS ballot-mail requirements are lawful postal controls and should be enforced for the November 2026 election.
Sources (1)
- USPS v. California: Government application for a stay, No. 26A305 · United States Postal ServicePrinted p.13 (PDF p.18); application’s argument and requested relief
Disputed claim
American Civil Liberties Union
USPS lacks authority to impose these election-administration requirements, and enforcing them now would threaten voters’ access to mailed ballots.
Sources (1)
- Joint plaintiff-and-counsel statement after court blocks USPS ballot requirements · American Civil Liberties UnionJoint statement following announcement of preliminary relief
Disputed claim
Applying the new USPS rule in the 2026 elections would be arbitrary and capricious because election officials lack sufficient implementation time.
Sources (1)
- Supreme Court stay denial, Kavanaugh concurrence and Alito dissent: USPS v. California · Supreme Court of the United StatesPDF p.1: concurrence; pp.2–9: dissent and Thomas’s express joinder
Disputed claim
The key portions of the USPS ballot-mail rule exceed the Postal Service’s statutory authority, making the rule’s issuance ultra vires.
Sources (1)
- DSCC v. Trump: memorandum opinion granting preliminary injunctions against the USPS ballot-mail ruleStatutory-authority analysis at p.15; public-interest analysis at p.20; conclusion and date line at p.24.
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
2 matching responses. Newest first.
United States Postal ServicePostmaster General of the United States, interviewed by the Associated PressDirectly involvedBefore this statement
Given after the Supreme Court declined on September 14 to lift the block on the rule for the 2026 election. Steiner had planned to unveil the Federal Ballot Mail Portal around September 15.
"I don’t get to decide what rules that are put on us that I decide to accept or not accept. I looked at it more from the execution side."
Explicitly stayed outCase context: Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
Full statement and sources
Postmaster General David Steiner told the Associated Press that work on the Federal Ballot Mail Portal had stopped because of the injunction, and declined to express a view on whether the rules themselves were warranted, describing his role as execution rather than decision.
After the statement
The same report quotes an internal USPS memo to all employees, dated September 16, saying the agency will “not be enforcing any of these new rules in the 2026 federal election” and that for Election Mail it is “business as usual.” Steiner separately indicated USPS intends to keep pressing envelope and barcode standards through pricing in future elections.
AP: “Work has stopped on system that was key to Trump effort to limit mail voting, USPS chief says”Paragraphs carrying Postmaster General Steiner’s interview remarks and the quoted USPS employee memo.Why this label?
On whether the USPS ballot-mail rule should apply to the 2026 midterms, Steiner expressly declines to take a position, disclaiming any role in deciding the rules and casting himself as executing them. His operational statements are compliance with a court order, not a view on the merits: “there’s an injunction so we’re not doing anything” says the rule will not apply, not that it should not. “Defended or excused” would misread his pride in the IT delivery as an endorsement of the policy; “Condemned” has no support in the text. The decline is explicit and quotable, which is what separates this from mere silence.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Donald TrumpPresident of the United StatesDirectly involvedBefore this statement
The Supreme Court had denied a stay of the preliminary injunction against the USPS rule for the 2026 midterms.
"Republicans just got another bad decision from the United States Supreme Court ... It is a big loss for Republicans, and America itself."
Defended or excusedCase context: Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
Full statement and sources
Trump criticizes the Court’s refusal to allow the ballot-mail rule to take effect for the 2026 midterms and presents the rule as a response to what he calls mail-in voting problems.
After the statement
Trump continues by criticizing the Court and its members; the post contains no contrary position on applying the rule.
Donald Trump calls the Supreme Court mail-voting decision a loss for Republicans and AmericaTruth Social post ID 117275286602582454, published 2026-09-15 13:27:40 UTCWhy this label?
Relative to whether the new ballot-mail restrictions should apply in 2026, Trump describes the block as a loss and portrays enforcement as the needed response to alleged mail-in voting problems.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(47)
Original text
USPS final rule: Ballot Mail for Federal Elections
Relevant passage: 91 FR 54966–54992; DMM 705.24.3–24.6
About this source
Final rule effective August 21 and published August 26. It requires ballot-envelope standards, portal registration and voter enrollment, and verification of outgoing ballot mail; return ballot mail is excluded from the verification process. USPS says it does not determine voter eligibility.
- Author
- United States Postal Service
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
New Voting Habits Emerge As Democrats Surge In The Early Vote
Relevant passage: HuffPost report on early in-person voting by Democrats in several states, with interviews with Democratic officials and organizers
Excerpt
"Among Democrats, mail voting is down and early in-person voting is up, a notable shift from other post-COVID elections."
About this source
HuffPost says it is not immediately clear what caused the change. The article cites Democratic officials and organizers who say some voters distrust the mail after the administration's effort to restrict mail voting.
- Author
- Paul Blumenthal
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
After Trump attacks on voting by mail, a growing number of Americans are instead casting ballots in person
Relevant passage: Votebeat analysis of state early-voting data in North Carolina, Georgia and Wisconsin, with Pew Research polling and interviews with election scholars
Excerpt
"Clear examples of the shift are North Carolina, Georgia, and Wisconsin, where, on average, early in-person voting is up 35% compared with 2022 and voting by mail and drop box is down about 35%."
About this source
Votebeat says the causes of the shift are not entirely clear. Election scholars it interviewed point to Trump's attacks on mail voting, falling confidence in the Postal Service and the end of pandemic-era voting habits.
- Author
- Dion Nissenbaum and Carter Walker
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
JB Pritzker on Illinois early voting and the mail-voting lawsuit
Relevant passage: Single post on Pritzker's verified Bluesky account
Excerpt
"That's why we added polling locations statewide, and when Donald Trump threatened mail-in voting, we took him to court—and won."
About this source
The post also says 1.1 million Illinois residents had already voted early and links to a voter-information site. Illinois joined the multistate lawsuit against the Postal Service's ballot-mail rule on August 26.
- Author
- JB Pritzker
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Trump sows doubt about mail-in voting while encouraging it, as midterms approach
Relevant passage: Trump's October 5 remarks to reporters on the White House South Lawn; October 3 video
Excerpt
""No, vote by mail or vote in person. I'd rather have a vote in person. But they can vote by mail if they want, because we seem to have no choice," Trump said"
About this source
ABC News report on President Trump's remarks about mail voting before he left for a rally in Nebraska on October 5.
- Author
- Katherine Faulders and Nicholas Kerr
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Mail voting is down so far among Pennsylvania Democrats. Is Trump to blame?
Relevant passage: Paragraphs on mail-ballot request data as of October 19
Excerpt
"As of Oct. 19, mail ballot requests from Democrats are down 14% from the equivalent point in the 2022 election."
About this source
Votebeat's report, produced in partnership with Spotlight PA, on Pennsylvania mail-ballot requests and returns by party.
- Author
- Carter Walker
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Kate Starbird on voter confusion about mail-in voting
Relevant passage: Original post
Excerpt
"The bad news: The Trump admin's efforts to interfere w/ mail-in-voting were successful in sowing doubt & confusion."
About this source
Starbird's post links a University of Washington Center for an Informed Public article on voter confusion about mail voting.
- Author
- Kate Starbird
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Tammy Baldwin on Trump, the Postal Service and the midterms
Relevant passage: Post on the senator's official Bluesky account
Excerpt
"Directing the USPS to restrict mail-in voting"
About this source
Baldwin's post lists three actions by President Trump ahead of the November election.
- Author
- Tammy Baldwin
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Josh Shapiro on Trump and mail-in voting
Relevant passage: First post in a two-post thread on the governor's official Bluesky account
Excerpt
"Donald Trump tried to prevent Pennsylvania voters from making their voices heard in this election by attempting to limit mail-in voting."
About this source
In a reply in the same thread, Shapiro says Pennsylvania took Trump to court over mail voting and won.
- Author
- Josh Shapiro
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Declaration of Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes
Relevant passage: Case 1:26-cv-13917-IT, Document 4-5; paragraphs 17-21, pages 9-12; executed August 25 on page 30, filed August 26.
About this source
Fontes submitted sworn evidence opposing the USPS ballot-mail requirements for the November 2026 election.
- Author
- Adrian Fontes
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
The Untold Origins of Trump's Plan to Sharply Restrict Mail-In Voting (ProPublica, September 28, 2026)
Relevant passage: Paragraphs 2-3, 11-15, 17-18 and 27-35
Excerpt
"the administration initially floated an idea that would have virtually shut down mail voting: requiring all ballots to be delivered exclusively through certified mail"
About this source
ProPublica reports, citing several people knowledgeable about the discussions, that the White House first proposed requiring all ballots to be sent by certified mail before abandoning the idea over Postal Service objections, that postal officials were left out of later drafting, and that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick served in an advisory and coordination role. It quotes an emailed statement from White House spokesperson Lauren Bis defending the order, a Commerce Department spokesperson, the Postal Service's referral to an earlier statement by Postmaster General David Steiner, and an interview with American Postal Workers Union president Jonathan Smith.
- Author
- Jen Fifield and Peter Elkind
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
USPS proposed rule for federal ballot mail
Relevant passage: Proposed rule, sections 24.3-24.5
About this source
USPS proposed mandatory envelope standards, voter-list submissions and screening requirements for federal ballot mail.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Forty-seven senators' June 23 letter on ballot-mail restrictions
Relevant passage: June 23 letter, opening and signatories
About this source
Forty-seven senators sent USPS leaders a joint letter opposing the proposed ballot-mail restrictions and demanding their withdrawal.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Blumenthal and Kligerman statements on USPS ballot screening
Relevant passage: Blumenthal's attributed quotation; Kligerman's attributed quotation
About this source
Contains statements by Richard Blumenthal, David Kligerman about usps ballot screening.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Secretary of State Steve Hobbs' comments on USPS proposed ballot rule
Relevant passage: Opening paragraphs of the comments, from 'I oppose USPS's proposed rule' through 'To start, there is insufficient time to implement the rule', page dated June 26, 2026
Excerpt
"I oppose USPS’s proposed rule for handling ballot mail in federal elections in alignment with Executive Order 14399 regarding elections."
About this source
The Washington Secretary of State's posting of the comments Hobbs submitted to the Postal Service on its proposed ballot-mail rule.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
USPS workers most impacted by mail-in ballot EO haven’t been trained yet, union warns
Relevant passage: Paragraphs quoting Smith on the executive order, about two-thirds of the way through the article dated September 10, 2026
Excerpt
"“It addresses a problem that does not exist,” Smith said about the mail-in ballot executive order. “It’s to create chaos and put doubt in the American people's minds about voting by mail.”"
About this source
Government Executive interview with the APWU president on postal workers' training for the executive order's ballot-mail changes, published while the Supreme Court was considering the government's request.
- Author
- Jory Heckman
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Federal Court Blocks U.S. Postal Service from Implementing Executive Order Restricting Mail Voting
Relevant passage: Statement attributed to Marcia Johnson, chief of activation and justice, League of Women Voters, in the plaintiffs' statements near the end of the release dated August 11, 2026
Excerpt
"Neither the president nor the U.S. Postal Service has the authority to rewrite election rules."
About this source
ACLU press release on the preliminary injunction in League of Women Voters of Massachusetts v. Trump, with statements from the plaintiffs and their counsel.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Supreme Court ruling blocks administration from restricting mail-in ballots
Relevant passage: Paragraph beginning 'These measures were challenged in the courts', page dated September 15, 2026
Excerpt
"However, on Aug. 24, the Supreme Court overturned that order and allowed the Postal Service to proceed with planning."
About this source
News item on the union's website summarizing the litigation over the executive order and quoting NALC President Brian L. Renfroe on the Supreme Court's September 14 ruling.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
NALC statement on Supreme Court ruling on mail-in ballots
Relevant passage: Full statement, dated August 25, 2026
Excerpt
"States administer elections. Neither the executive branch nor the Postal Service has the authority to regulate elections, rewrite election laws, or determine who is eligible to vote by mail."
About this source
Statement on the union's website, released by NALC President Brian L. Renfroe the day after a Supreme Court ruling on mail-in ballots.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
NAACP, Civil Rights Groups Secure Preliminary Injunction in USPS Case Against Donald Trump
Relevant passage: Press statement of September 14, 2026, statement attributed to NAACP General Counsel Kristen Clarke.
Excerpt
"We urge the Supreme Court to reject this administration's request to green light this unlawful scheme"
About this source
NAACP press statement on the preliminary injunction that a federal court in Washington issued against the Postal Service ballot-mail rule. It quotes Clarke and Damon Hewitt of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Statement from USPS Postmaster General David Steiner regarding concerns about ballot mail for federal elections
Relevant passage: Second paragraph, final two sentences.
Excerpt
"We have at all times acted within our legal authority to issue a rule to achieve those policies, but ultimately the courts will decide that question, and we will follow the court’s determination. It is that simple."
About this source
Postal Service newsroom statement from Postmaster General David Steiner on the Federal Ballot Mail Rule. It says the agency acted within its legal authority in issuing the rule, describes the rule's barcode, envelope and voter-list requirements, and responds to a whistleblower's concerns about the development schedule.
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Trevor Potter's statement on the Supreme Court blocking the mail voting executive order
Relevant passage: Bluesky post by @thetrevorpotter.bsky.social, 2026-09-15 00:23 UTC, the first post of a numbered thread.
Excerpt
"Tonight's Supreme Court decision prevents the U.S. Postal Service from sowing chaos in our elections"
About this source
The speaker's own post on Bluesky. It opens a numbered thread, so the excerpt is the opening statement rather than his complete argument. Potter's organisation, the Campaign Legal Center, is a party to the litigation; his earlier posts record a preliminary injunction on September 4, a further district court block on September 14, and an amicus brief filed in August on behalf of more than 50 former state and federal judges.
- Author
- Trevor Potter
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Michigan Public: Ottawa County Clerk Justin Roebuck on the USPS ballot-mail rule
Relevant passage: Interview transcript, answer on what clerks would need if the rule returned before 2028.
Excerpt
"I think what to me is ironic about the USPS rule set is that it actually doesn’t accomplish what a lot of people in the political sphere are talking about it accomplishing, which is somehow this idea that USPS would prevent ineligible voters from casting an absentee ballot."
About this source
Interview with a Republican county clerk and prominent Michigan election-administration voice, disputing the anti-fraud characterisation of the rule from within the party that advanced it. He also says the Supreme Court decision was “so critical” for clerks to know the ground rules before the election, and notes USPS itself disclaimed any role in voter eligibility.
- Author
- Kalloli Bhatt, Zoe Clark and Rick Pluta
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
AP: “Work has stopped on system that was key to Trump effort to limit mail voting, USPS chief says”
Relevant passage: Paragraphs carrying Postmaster General Steiner’s interview remarks and the quoted USPS employee memo.
Excerpt
"“There’s an injunction so we’re not doing anything,” postmaster general David Steiner told The Associated Press in an interview. ... Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, a memo sent to all postal service employees Wednesday and obtained by the AP said the agency will “not be enforcing any of these new rules in the 2026 federal election.”"
About this source
First on-record remarks by Postmaster General David Steiner on the ballot-mail rule. He says work on the Federal Ballot Mail Portal has stopped, that he had planned to unveil it around September 15, and that he approached the rule “from the execution side” rather than deciding its merits. The article also quotes an internal USPS memo to all employees, dated Wednesday September 16, stating the agency will not enforce the rules in the 2026 federal election. The memo itself is not public and exists here only as AP-quoted material. This is the PBS NewsHour syndication of the AP story; the AP original is at apnews.com/article/trump-mail-ballot-us-postal-service-995f98147fbb49fb71696be824abff95.
- Author
- Steven Sloan, Associated Press
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Trump Learns You Can't Spell "Mail" Without "L" (The Bulwark)
About this source
The Bulwark's Morning Shots newsletter, Andrew Egger, on the SCOTUS mail-in ballot ruling.
- Published
- Accessed
Original video
Roland Martin Unfiltered on SCOTUS mail-in ballot ruling
About this source
Roland Martin Unfiltered segment on the Supreme Court blocking Trump's mail-in ballot restrictions.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Top GOP election chiefs call on Supreme Court to halt mail-voting restrictions
Excerpt
"late changes almost always lead to unforeseen consequences"
About this source
Democracy Docket report on an amicus brief filed by six Republican secretaries of state and election officials urging the Supreme Court to keep its block on Trump's mail-in voting restrictions.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Attorney General James Secures Supreme Court Victory Protecting Mail-In Voting
Excerpt
"This last-minute change could have thrown our elections into chaos, and I am truly relieved the Court granted this reprieve."
About this source
NY Attorney General Letitia James's official statement welcoming the Supreme Court's block on Trump's mail-in voting restrictions.
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Breaking Points on Trump's mail-in voting restrictions
Excerpt
"more pragmatic... than principled"
About this source
Breaking Points (Ryan Grim and Emily Jashinsky) segment on the Supreme Court's ruling against Trump's mail-in voting restrictions.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
DNC, DCCC, DSCC, and DGA joint statement on the Supreme Court's mail-in voting ruling
Excerpt
"The highest court in the nation yesterday ruled for the American voter and against chaos... Democrats will use every tool at our disposal to stop them."
About this source
Joint statement from DNC Chair Ken Martin, DCCC Chair Suzan DelBene, DSCC Chair Kirsten Gillibrand, and DGA Chair Andy Beshear on the Supreme Court's ruling against Trump's mail-in voting executive order.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Supreme Court mail-in ballot ruling shakes up midterm races
Excerpt
"The RNC will continue to back President Trump's efforts to secure elections... This fight is far from over, and Republicans will not rest until America's ballot box is fully protected."
About this source
Newsweek report including an emailed statement from RNC Election Integrity Communications Director Ally Triolo defending the administration's mail-in voting restrictions after the September 14 Supreme Court ruling.
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Attorney General Mayes Secures Court Order to Protect Arizonans’ Right to Vote by Mail
Relevant passage: Statement quotation block.
Excerpt
"“This is a win for every Arizona voter and the rule of law.”"
About this source
Official release from the Arizona attorney general’s office, dated August 28, 2026, announcing a temporary restraining order against the USPS rule. It predates both the September injunctions and the Supreme Court’s denial of the stay.
- Author
- Office of the Arizona Attorney General
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Nevada Secretary of State Francisco Aguilar releases statement on Supreme Court ruling on executive order on mail ballots
Relevant passage: Statement quotation block.
Excerpt
"“The Supreme Court’s ruling is another attempt to attack states’ constitutional right to run elections.”"
About this source
Official release from the Nevada secretary of state’s office, dated August 24, 2026. It responds to the earlier Supreme Court order that allowed the executive order to proceed, not to the September 14 denial of the stay.
- Author
- Office of the Nevada Secretary of State
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
DSCC v. Trump: memorandum opinion granting preliminary injunctions against the USPS ballot-mail rule
Relevant passage: Statutory-authority analysis at p.15; public-interest analysis at p.20; conclusion and date line at p.24.
Excerpt
"“The key portions of the Rule exceed any conception of the outer bounds of these authorities.”"
About this source
The signed 24-page opinion of Judge Carl J. Nichols, in consolidated actions DSCC v. Trump (26-cv-01114) and League of United Latin American Citizens v. Executive Office of the President (26-cv-01132), with NAACP plaintiffs also joined. It is a second, separate injunction from the Massachusetts case already recorded in this case. The court granted the LULAC and NAACP motions in full and the DSCC motion in part.
- Author
- Judge Carl J. Nichols, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
District-court preliminary injunction against mandatory USPS ballot-mail provisions
Relevant passage: Attached district order, Doc.156, No.1:26-cv-13917-IT; printed pp.45–49 (PDF pp.47–51)
About this source
Official Supreme Court-hosted copy of the 49-page district order attached to a September 4 letter. Mandatory provisions are blocked for elections on or before November 3; voluntary compliance is not barred. The hosting docket 26A297 is the earlier application, not the later operative stay docket.
- Author
- Judge Indira Talwani; filing transmitted by government counsel
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Weber, Bonta and Newsom respond to Supreme Court mail-voting decision
Relevant passage: Press release 26-116; separately attributed quotation blocks
About this source
California officials welcome the stay denial and oppose enforcement before the midterms. The release contains distinct statements from Weber, Bonta and Newsom.
- Author
- California Secretary of State; Shirley Weber, Rob Bonta and Gavin Newsom
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
First Circuit order denying stays of the USPS ballot-mail injunction
Relevant passage: Order in No.26-2029 and consolidated appeals
About this source
Appellate order denying stays of preliminary relief. It precedes the Supreme Court’s September 14 denial.
- Author
- United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Joint plaintiff-and-counsel statement after court blocks USPS ballot requirements
Relevant passage: Joint statement following announcement of preliminary relief
About this source
Coalition statement opposing the rule’s authority and immediate implementation. The quotation is jointly issued, not an independently attributed statement from every listed organization or spokesperson.
- Author
- Plaintiff organizations and counsel, including the ACLU
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Alabama-led attorneys general support proposed USPS ballot-mail requirements
Relevant passage: July 2 comment letter; proposed-rule support and signatories
About this source
Thirteen attorneys general support the proposed rule as an election-integrity measure. This predates the final rule and is background, not a new September response.
- Author
- Steve Marshall and other state attorneys general
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Merkley and Wyden urge Supreme Court to block USPS mail-voting rule
Relevant passage: Separately attributed Merkley and Wyden quotation blocks
About this source
Joint Senate release with each senator’s own criticism of the rule. Descriptions of Trump’s motives and the rule’s legality are their positions.
- Author
- Offices of Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Supreme Court docket No. 26A305: USPS v. California
Relevant passage: September 6 application, September 9 responses and September 14 order
About this source
Operative Supreme Court docket. The earlier application numbered 26A297 was withdrawn and replaced; the filings and order should not be assigned to that superseded application.
- Author
- Clerk of the Supreme Court
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Current and former election officials: Amicus brief in USPS v. California
Relevant passage: Argument on 2026 implementation; appendix listing amici
About this source
Brief formally supports neither party but opposes immediate implementation before the November election. Current officials participate in their individual capacities, not on behalf of their jurisdictions.
- Author
- Counsel for current and former election officials
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Supreme Court stay denial, Kavanaugh concurrence and Alito dissent: USPS v. California
Relevant passage: PDF p.1: concurrence; pp.2–9: dissent and Thomas’s express joinder
About this source
The Court denies a stay of the preliminary injunction. Kavanaugh objects to applying the rule in 2026; Alito would grant the stay and Thomas joins him. This is emergency relief, not final disposition of every challenge to the executive order.
- Author
- Supreme Court of the United States; Brett Kavanaugh; Samuel Alito
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
California and other states: Opposition to USPS stay application, No. 26A305
Relevant passage: Introduction; statutory-authority and implementation sections
About this source
Respondent states dispute USPS’s authority and warn that immediate compliance would disrupt election administration. Statements quoted from election officials remain attributed to those officials.
- Author
- Counsel for California and other respondent states
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
USPS v. California: Government application for a stay, No. 26A305
Relevant passage: Printed p.13 (PDF p.18); application’s argument and requested relief
About this source
Government litigation position seeking immediate relief from the preliminary injunction. It argues that the requirements fall within postal powers and protect against fraudulent use of the mail.
- Author
- D. John Sauer and government counsel
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Executive Order 14399: Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections
Relevant passage: Sections 1 and 3
About this source
Presidential directive underlying the later USPS rule. Its broader citizenship-verification language must be distinguished from the final postal rule.
- Author
- Donald Trump
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Donald Trump calls the Supreme Court mail-voting decision a loss for Republicans and America
Relevant passage: Truth Social post ID 117275286602582454, published 2026-09-15 13:27:40 UTC
Excerpt
"Republicans just got another bad decision from the United States Supreme Court."
About this source
Trump’s post responds to the Supreme Court’s September 14 decision leaving the 2026 block on the federal ballot-mail rule in place. He says the Court cited inadequate implementation time, calls the rule’s current status a loss for Republicans and America, and characterizes mail-in voting as corrupt.
- Author
- Donald J. Trump
- Published
- Accessed
Corrections
(3)
Corrections address errors in our reporting or labels. When a speaker changes their position, we add a separate statement and link it to the earlier one.
Reporting correction
Correction to: Statement by Letitia James
- Previous language
- Speaker: Ken Martin
- Corrected language
- Speaker: Letitia James
We attributed New York Attorney General Letitia James's statement to Ken Martin. Her office issued the statement, and we have corrected the speaker.
This corrects our account of what happened.
NY Attorney General Letitia James's official statement welcoming the Supreme Court's block on Trump's mail-in voting restrictions.
Reporting correction
Correction to: Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
- Previous language
- Case context summary: “The September 14 Supreme Court decision denied emergency relief from the preliminary injunction; the broader legal challenge remains distinct from this election’s rollout.” Case neutral summary: “On September 14, the Supreme Court left a temporary block in place for the 2026 election.”
- Corrected language
- The rule is blocked by two separate preliminary injunctions issued in different district courts, and the case text should not refer to a single injunction. Context summary, corrected: “The September 14 Supreme Court decision denied emergency relief from the injunction issued in the District of Massachusetts. A second preliminary injunction, issued on September 13 by Judge Carl J. Nichols in the District of Columbia, blocks the rule independently and was not before the Supreme Court. The broader legal challenge remains distinct from this election’s rollout.” Neutral summary, corrected: “On September 14, the Supreme Court left a temporary block in place for the 2026 election, one of two separate injunctions against the rule.”
The case text describes a single preliminary injunction. On September 13, 2026, a day before the Supreme Court acted, Judge Carl J. Nichols granted preliminary injunctions against the same rule in the District of Columbia, in the consolidated actions DSCC v. Trump (26-cv-01114) and League of United Latin American Citizens v. Executive Office of the President (26-cv-01132), with NAACP plaintiffs also joined. That ruling is independent of the Massachusetts injunction and was not before the Supreme Court. Readers of the current text would reasonably infer that the Supreme Court’s denial governed the only order blocking the rule, and that a reversal there would have cleared the way for enforcement. Both inferences are wrong while the second injunction stands. The court granted the LULAC and NAACP motions in full and the DSCC motion in part.
This corrects our account of what happened.
The signed 24-page opinion of Judge Carl J. Nichols, in consolidated actions DSCC v. Trump (26-cv-01114) and League of United Latin American Citizens v. Executive Office of the President (26-cv-01132), with NAACP plaintiffs also joined. It is a second, separate injunction from the Massachusetts case already recorded in this case. The court granted the LULAC and NAACP motions in full and the DSCC motion in part.
Reporting correction
Correction to: Statement by Brett Kavanaugh
- Previous language
- The published position event listed no source in its Sources field.
- Corrected language
- The event should link to Source #721, the Supreme Court’s USPS v. California order and opinions (PDF p. 1 for Kavanaugh’s concurrence).
The event’s quotation is supported by the existing primary source attached to its related claim, but the event itself omits that source from its Sources field. This correction adds the source citation only; the quotation, classification, and summary are unchanged.
This corrects our account of what happened.
The Court denies a stay of the preliminary injunction. Kavanaugh objects to applying the rule in 2026; Alito would grant the stay and Thomas joins him. This is emergency relief, not final disposition of every challenge to the executive order.
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/trump-usps-mail-in-ballot-restrictions-2026-midterms
The Dispute Index. "Should Trump’s new mail-in voting restrictions apply to the 2026 midterms?". First published: 2026-09-15. Last updated: 2026-10-07. https://disputeindex.com/cases/trump-usps-mail-in-ballot-restrictions-2026-midterms