Federal Judge Blocks Implementation of Trump’s Executive Order Restricting Postal Service From Mailing Ballots Not In Federal Database

Sep 5, 2026 11:50 PM EDT, Sat

Judge extends block on Trump’s mail-in ballot limits

The federal judge’s preliminary injunction comes two months before the midterm elections as President Donald Trump seeks to limit mail voting.

By Casey Gannon

Sept. 4, 2026, 6:38 PM EDT

A federal judge on Friday extended a block on President Donald Trump’s efforts to restrict mail-in voting with just two months to go before the midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts heard arguments Thursday before issuing a preliminary injunction Friday blocking key provisions of a U.S. Postal Service rule implementing Trump’s mail-in ballot executive order. That rule directed states to only deliver mail-in ballots to eligible voters on federal citizenship lists.

“In balancing the harms based on the record before the court, the court finds, on one side, that 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,” Talwani wrote in her Friday ruling. “On the other side, that the record includes no evidence relating to fraudulent mail voting to support the rushed implementation of the Final Rule.

Talwani had previously placed a 14-day temporary block on several key provisions of the USPS rule, finding a lack of evidence suggesting that there was fraudulent mail-in voting.

Democratic-led states and voting rights organizations are suing over USPS’ implementation of Trump’s executive order, which seeks to restrict voting by mail around the country. The plaintiffs argue that, according to the Constitution, only Congress can alter election law, and that it has not elected to do so. The government contends there is no constitutional challenge at play.

Talwani sided with the plaintiffs on the constitutional question Friday, finding that the USPS rule “encroaches” on the states’ and Congress’ powers under the Elections Clause.

“The Constitution’s Elections Clause tasks the States with the role of election administration, subject only to Congress’s superseding legislation, and the executive has no inherent authority in this joint endeavor,” Talwani said in her ruling Friday.

The judge heard arguments for nearly two hours on Thursday with much of it spent discussing the USPS Federal Ballot Mail Portal — designed to screen ballots submitted by state election officials before being sent to voters — and the process to develop it, which plaintiffs say has been accelerated to the detriment of voters.

In her ruling on Friday, Talwani addressed the portal multiple times. She emphasized that the government and USPS have not explained when the portal will be available for election officials to use or how states will upload voter data without compromising confidential voter information.

“Notably, Defendants make no effort to explain how States can both comply with the requirement to upload voter information, including addresses, to the USPS portal without violating their state laws and disclosing confidential voter information,” Talwani wrote.

The judge also said that complying with the portal required an “overwhelming expenditure” of time from election officials in terms of both using it and uploading information to it.

Thursday’s hearing came one day before the earliest state deadline to send out mail-in ballots to voters in the military or overseas, something Talwani acknowledged.

“I think we all understand there’s a time pressure here,” Talwani told counsel.

Talwani also emphasized the timing of the new requirements, noting that election officials are already busy administering elections.

“The Final Rule’s new requirements would be an extraordinary amount of work for local officials at any time. But imposing these mandates on election officials at present poses greater difficulties than otherwise because election officials are actively administering elections,” Talwani said.

During the hearing, Talwani questioned how the Postal Service rule would go into effect should she rule against a permanent block and told the government’s counsel that if it could not provide details on the process, she assumes “they aren’t finalized yet.”

Attorneys representing the government argued that they would like to be able to fully implement the final USPS rule, but did not offer details about the process to do so.

“I don’t even have a declaration from the Postal Service saying this is how we’re going to work. I have nothing,” Talwani said. “We’re not playing an intellectual puzzle game. We’re talking about people’s right to vote.”

Officials in multiple states have said they have received ““virtually no information”” on how the USPS rule will be implemented.

The government also argues that plaintiffs should not be using the courts to block the rule from taking effect, saying they should dispute the rule with the Postal Service in a formal complaint.

An attorney for the state of California told the judge that due to the rushed timeline, judicial intervention is more appropriate than a formal complaint.

“There’s absolutely no way to get relief in time for the election through that process,” said attorney Anne Bellows.

Talwani also concerns made public earlier in the week by a whistleblower who says the USPS portal being developed has been rushed and technically flawed, resulting in what one lawmaker says could “derail the midterm elections.”

“Given the whistleblower allegations, which we think are really credible … we think it is a certainty that some of these members we’ve identified will be disenfranchised,” said ACLU attorney Davin Rosborough.

The litigation challenging Trump’s executive order restricting mail-in voting already made its way to the Supreme Court once. The high court’s order order was a temporary win for the Trump administration, with the majority finding that the plaintiff’s lawsuit was brought prematurely.

But some Democratic states and voting-rights organizations immediately filed a new lawsuit following that decision, specifically targeting USPS instead of Trump’s executive order.

The Trump administration immediately appealed Talwani’s 14-day pause and is awaiting a ruling by the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene.

Casey Gannon is a producer with MS NOW’s Justice and Legal Unit

Related Posts

Navigation Within