Supreme Court Blocks Trump’s New Restrictions on Mail-In Voting Ahead of 2026 Elections

-Editorial

The U.S. Supreme Court blocked the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing new requirements for election ballot mail during the 2026 elections, dealing a decisive blow to President Donald Trump’s efforts to expand federal control over the midterm elections.

The court denied the federal government’s application for a stay in United States Postal Service v. California, No. 26A305, leaving in place a nationwide injunction against the rules. The justices said the government was unlikely to succeed in challenging the preliminary injunction and that the factors governing emergency relief did not support allowing the rule to take effect.

The dispute involves a Postal Service rule issued in late August that established new requirements for mail containing federal election ballots.

Under the rule, ballot mail envelopes would be required to include an election-mail logo, be compatible with high-speed Postal Service processing equipment, and contain a specialized barcode unique to each voter. States also would be required to submit envelope designs to the Postal Service for review and upload basic voter information through a Postal Service portal.

Mail that failed to meet the requirements would not be accepted and would be returned to election officials for correction, according to the rule.

California and other states challenged the requirements after the rule was issued, and a federal district court temporarily blocked implementation before converting the order into a nationwide preliminary injunction.

The federal government asked the Supreme Court to stay that injunction while litigation continued. The justices declined Monday, meaning the new requirements cannot be enforced while the injunction remains in effect.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh filed a concurring opinion. He said there was “at least a fair prospect” that the Postal Service has statutory authority to establish the rule. However, he concluded that applying it during the 2026 elections would violate the Administrative Procedure Act because state and local election officials did not have sufficient time to reasonably implement the requirements.

“For that reason, I concur in the denial of the application for stay,” Kavanaugh wrote.

Justice Samuel Alito dissented, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.

Alito argued that the government had demonstrated that it was likely to succeed on the merits and would suffer irreparable harm if the rule remained blocked. He also questioned whether some organizations challenging the rule had legal standing and whether the states could successfully argue that the Postal Service exceeded its statutory authority.

Alito cited federal law giving the Postal Service broad authority to establish regulations governing the collection, handling, transportation, delivery, and return of mail.

The case stems from a presidential directive issued about five months earlier instructing the Postal Service to begin rulemaking concerning election ballot mail. California and other states, along with several organizations, challenged aspects of that directive in federal court.

The Supreme Court previously intervened in the litigation and stayed an earlier injunction after concluding the district court likely lacked jurisdiction at that stage because the challenge was premature.

After the Postal Service issued its final rule in August, the district court again intervened and blocked implementation.

Alito acknowledged concerns raised by states about implementing the new requirements shortly before the midterm elections but said those concerns did not outweigh the federal government’s interests. He noted that 12 states had supported the rule in the lower court and argued that compliance was practicable.

The Supreme Court’s decision Monday does not resolve the underlying legal dispute over the Postal Service’s authority to establish ballot-mail requirements. Instead, it determines whether the rule may take effect while the case proceeds through the courts.

For the 2026 elections, the district court’s preliminary injunction remains in place, preventing enforcement of the Postal Service’s new ballot-mail requirements.