An Obama-appointed judge once again temporarily barred the U.S. Postal Service from carrying out President Donald Trump’s restrictions on mail-in ballots in a Thursday ruling.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani lifted a preliminary injunction Wednesday after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that some of Trump’s limits could remain in place. The judge issued a new ruling reversing the previous decision, arguing that USPS overstepped its legal mandate, which once again blocked Trump’s rule.
Trump signed an executive order on March 31 titled, “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections,” which established certain rules for the USPS regarding mail-in and absentee ballots. Section 3 of the executive order required all outgoing election mail to be marked as “Official Election Mail,” including a unique Intelligent Mail barcode and be pre-approved by the USPS for design and barcode placement.
“Where a state or local election official does not obtain envelope and return envelope design approval, or does not upload voter information, or does not include unique intelligent mail bar codes on ballot envelopes, the U.S.P.S. will not mail ballots to voters,” the ruling stated.
Talwani argued that Congress did not delegate authority to the USPS to regulate election mail. She argued the rules would prevent citizens from voting by mail unless the USPS approved the ballots in a timely manner.
The judge further argued that imposing these rules on the states is unconstitutional. She placed a fourteen-day stay on the “implementation or enforcement” of the rules, which prevents USPS from taking these steps ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
“The court finds Plaintiffs likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that (1) the USPS lacked authority to issue the Final Rule; (2) the Final Rule is unconstitutional in imposing these requirements on the States; and (3) the Final Rule is unconstitutional in prohibiting non-compliant State and local officials from using the United States Postal Service to mail ballots,” the judge said.
Talwani initially barred Section 3 in an Aug. 11 ruling after the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts and other activist groups sued the administration over the executive order.
A court in California issued a similar injunction, which reached the Supreme Court in the case, Trump v. California. The high court stayed the injunction, allowing the administration to move forward with the executive order.
All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
