Supreme Court declines stay on USPS mail-ballot rule, keeps current procedures for Nov. 3

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday refused to lift a lower-court order blocking the Trump administration’s new U.S. Postal Service mail-ballot rule, leaving existing mail-voting procedures in place ahead of the Nov. 3 midterm election.

The court’s Sept. 14 action means a preliminary injunction issued Sept. 4 by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts will remain in force for the Nov. 3 election and any earlier federal election while the case continues. In practical terms, state and local election officials will not have to overhaul ballot-mail systems weeks before voting, as some jurisdictions have already begun sending ballots.

In a brief order in United States Postal Service, et al. v. California, et al., No. 26A305, the justices denied the federal government’s emergency application for a stay, writing that the government “is unlikely to succeed on the merits” of its challenge to Talwani’s injunction. The application, the court said, “is denied.” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented.

The Supreme Court’s action was an emergency ruling on whether to pause the injunction, not a final decision on the underlying lawsuit. The broader appeal will continue in lower courts.

The challenged USPS rule, “Ballot Mail for Federal Elections,” was issued in late August after President Donald Trump’s March 31 executive order on federal elections directed related rulemaking. It would have required mailed ballots to meet new standards for envelope design and automation compatibility, use a voter-specific Intelligent Mail barcode, go through a mailpiece design review process, and in some cases rely on a federal ballot portal and enrollment system. Ballot mailings that did not comply could be refused or returned.

States challenging the rule argued those changes were being imposed too late for election offices to implement safely and consistently before the midterms. Timing became a central issue in the case: court filings said some states had already started mailing ballots, and federal law requires ballots for military and overseas voters to be transmitted by Sept. 19.

A bipartisan group of current and former election officials told the Supreme Court in a Sept. 9 friend-of-the-court brief that the rule could not be put in place before the Nov. 3 election. A USPS declaration filed Sept. 3 said the agency was still developing the ballot portal and expected to make it available for voluntary use “sometime next week.” A whistleblower letter released Aug. 31 by Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s office warned of “potentially catastrophic problems” and said development of the portal had been rushed.

The administration had already lost requests for emergency relief in lower courts before turning to the Supreme Court.

The lawsuit was filed Aug. 26 by a coalition led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford and Washington Attorney General Nick Brown, joined by other Democratic attorneys general and Pennsylvania’s governor.

Bonta called Monday’s ruling “a victory for our democracy and a powerful affirmation of the rule of law.”

For now, the high court’s order leaves Talwani’s injunction in place and preserves the mail-voting procedures already being used as the legal fight over the USPS rule moves forward.