States Sue to Block Trump Mail Voting Restrictions

A coalition of 24 Democratic-led states, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro filed a new lawsuit Wednesday against the U.S. Postal Service, challenging a final rule that implements President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting mail voting ahead of the November midterm elections. The legal action comes just two days after the Supreme Court’s conservative majority lifted an earlier injunction blocking the order, ruling that states had sued prematurely.

Background: The Executive Order and Legal Battle

Trump signed Executive Order No. 14399, titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” on March 31, directing the Department of Homeland Security to develop state lists of adult U.S. citizens and instructing USPS to deliver mail ballots only to voters on USPS-generated lists. The order represents one of Trump’s most aggressive efforts to exert federal control over election administration since returning to power, as NPR reported.

In June, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston issued an injunction blocking key provisions of the order in 23 states and D.C., ruling that Trump overstepped presidential authority under the Constitution. The administration appealed, and on Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Trump v. California that the states’ challenge was premature because the policies had not yet been finalized. The Court explicitly stated its decision “does not mean that any measure taken by the Government to implement the Order will necessarily be lawful,” adding, “On that score, time will tell,” as USA Today reported.

The USPS Final Rule

On Friday, August 21, USPS published a 95-page final rule implementing the executive order. The rule requires states to enroll every voter eligible to vote by mail with USPS, compile enrolled voters into state-specific lists, and submit voter names and addresses to a new USPS online portal. It also establishes new design requirements for mail-in ballot envelopes requiring federal approval and unique Intelligent Mail barcodes. Critically, USPS would reject ballots not appearing on its generated lists or failing to comply with envelope standards, as CNBC detailed.

Election officials warn the rule will be “impossible to implement” in the days before the first wave of mail ballots are sent out next week, with the midterm elections less than 10 weeks away, according to CBS News.

The New Lawsuit

The states argue the USPS rule violates the Constitution by interfering with states’ authority to administer elections, exceeds USPS’s statutory authority, violates the Privacy Act, and is inconsistent with federal voting rights law. As California Attorney General Rob Bonta explained, “The U.S. Constitution gives states the power to regulate elections — not the President and not USPS.” The coalition’s complaint states that the rule “violates the Constitution and federal statutes many times over” and “cannot be reconciled with federal voting rights law.”

“Across the country, states are already deep into preparations for the 2026 elections,” New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a statement. “Now, at the last moment, the federal government is attempting to meddle in those preparations and potentially threaten countless Americans’ right to vote. USPS has no authority to decide who can and cannot vote by mail,” as PBS NewsHour reported.

California Governor Gavin Newsom was equally blunt: “Donald Trump does not run elections. States do. And his latest attack on democracy is proof of how weak he has become.”

The coalition is also filing a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the rule’s implementation while litigation continues. The states argue the rule would require them to “develop new systems at breakneck speed” and accomplish “multiple Herculean tasks” in a matter of weeks with limited resources.

A Separate Injunction Remains

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, a separate nationwide injunction issued by Judge Talwani on August 11 in a case brought by the League of Women Voters and other voting rights groups still blocks USPS from implementing the rule for the November 3 midterm election. The administration has asked the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to pause this injunction, as Votebeat explained.

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissenting from Monday’s ruling, warned that the decision “needlessly injects chaos and uncertainty into the upcoming midterm elections.” She noted that the Court “has not foreclosed States from challenging this blatantly unconstitutional Order” but declined to explain when exactly would be the right time to bring such a claim, as Jurist reported.

White House spokesperson Lauren Bis defended the administration’s position, calling the measures “commonsense measures that protect the security of mail-in ballots” and stating that “the Trump Administration will continue to lawfully enact the agenda President Trump was elected on.”

Broader Context

Trump has long targeted mail voting, which he falsely blames for his 2020 election loss. Mail voting is disproportionately used by Democrats as a result of Trump’s condemnations, though Trump himself voted by mail as recently as this year in Florida. During the 2024 general election, nearly 1 in 3 Americans voted by mail, as MPR News noted.

Congress has never exercised authority to limit mail voting and has only acted to expand and protect it for military and overseas voters. The new lawsuit strategically follows the Supreme Court’s guidance — the Court said states sued too early because the policies were not yet finalized. Now that USPS has published its final rule, the states have the concrete policy to challenge, as NY Post noted.

What’s Next

The legal fight over mail voting is far from over. Judge Talwani has yet to rule on the administration’s request to lift the separate injunction, and the new lawsuit filed Wednesday will proceed through the courts. With ballots set to be mailed in the coming weeks and the midterm elections less than 10 weeks away, the timing of these rulings could have significant implications for how millions of Americans cast their votes.

As the Supreme Court itself noted, “time will tell” whether the administration’s measures will ultimately be deemed lawful. For now, the battle over voting access in America continues to unfold in courtrooms across the country.