WASHINGTON, Aug. 28 (Nationwide Times) — A federal judge has again stopped the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out new mail-ballot requirements linked to President Donald Trump’s March executive order, temporarily blocking the policy nationwide as legal challenges continue.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued a 14-day temporary restraining order on Aug. 27. The order prevents USPS from implementing a final rule released Aug. 21. Talwani’s court is in Boston, while related litigation has also been brought in federal court in Washington, D.C.
The temporary order is set to be considered at a Sept. 3 hearing. The judge could then decide whether to issue a longer-lasting injunction, which would continue blocking the policy while the case proceeds.
What would the postal rule require?
The USPS rule would require states to provide lists of voters who are eligible to receive mail ballots. It also would require ballots to use a specified envelope format that has been reviewed and carries a unique barcode.
The requirements are part of the administration’s effort to involve the Postal Service in election procedures. Trump’s executive order sought to create a federal voter list and change how mail voting is handled.
States and voting-rights groups have challenged the policy, arguing that the administration does not have the authority to impose the requirements and that the changes could disrupt state election systems. The litigation includes Democratic-led states, the League of Women Voters and other voting-rights organizations. A separate case was filed by the Democratic Party in federal court in Washington, D.C.
Those challenges are allegations in the lawsuits, not findings that the administration’s policy is unlawful. The legal question remains unresolved.
Why did the judge issue another order?
The latest order followed a series of rulings involving the same policy.
In June, Talwani issued an injunction affecting 23 mostly Democratic-led states and Washington, D.C. On Aug. 11, she issued a nationwide injunction blocking USPS from implementing the plan.
Talwani later lifted that injunction after the Supreme Court issued a procedural order affecting the case. The high court’s unsigned order did not decide whether Trump’s executive order was lawful. Instead, it said the government’s actions to implement the order would not necessarily be lawful simply because of the Supreme Court’s procedural decision.
“Disposition of this application does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful.”
The Postal Service’s release of its final rule on Aug. 21 restarted the challenge. Talwani’s new temporary restraining order now blocks USPS from putting that rule into effect for 14 days.
What happens next?
The Sept. 3 hearing will give Talwani an opportunity to consider whether the policy should remain blocked for a longer period. The case could also move through the federal appeals courts or return to the Supreme Court.
The administration and the challengers may seek review in the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals or ask the Supreme Court to intervene. The record provided does not show what final appeal decisions the administration has made.
The dispute has moved quickly because the new requirements would affect state election systems and ballot preparation before the midterm elections. Talwani wrote that states would need time and money to create new ballot designs, obtain approval, produce ballots, update election systems, train election workers and upload voter data to a USPS portal.
A separate federal case in Washington, D.C., has added another layer to the litigation. On July 1, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan issued a nationwide order blocking USPS from implementing the plan, citing a 2020 settlement involving the agency. U.S. District Judge Carl J. Nichols, also in Washington, D.C., had earlier declined to immediately block Trump’s executive order, finding that a challenge was premature before USPS issued its rule.
The overlapping lawsuits and appeals mean the policy’s legal status could change again before ballots are mailed. For now, Talwani’s latest order prevents USPS from implementing the final rule while the court considers the next stage of the case.
