Democratic States Stand Up to Authoritarian USPS Mail-Ballot Power Grab
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
California and 23 other Democratic-led states are fighting back against the U.S. Postal Service’s undemocratic attempt to seize control over mail-in ballots, which they argue threatens voter privacy and undermines the integrity of state-run elections.
California, together with 23 other states led by Democratic attorneys general and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro, has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts to urgently block new U.S. Postal Service regulations for mail-in ballots. These states argue that the rules, hastily issued in a 95-page final rule last Friday, represent a blatant federal overreach, stripping states of their constitutional authority over elections. The regulations would force states to hand over detailed voter lists to the Postal Service, creating a dangerous nationwide database that could expose sensitive voter information to federal law enforcement agencies—an alarming move toward mass surveillance and voter intimidation.
The Postal Service claims these changes are needed to comply with President Trump’s March executive order, which also directs the Department of Homeland Security to assemble its own lists of eligible voters for comparison with state data. The new rules would require ballot envelopes to include digital bar codes, empowering the Postal Service to reject ballots that don’t match the federalized lists—a clear attempt to disenfranchise voters, particularly those from marginalized communities.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta denounced the rule, stating, "This mail-in voting rule is an unlawful overreach… we are confident that the facts and the law are on our side." Governor Gavin Newsom added, "Donald Trump does not run elections. States do. And his latest attack on democracy is proof of how weak he has become." Their statements underscore the existential threat posed by federal interference in the democratic process.
This lawsuit comes after a deeply troubling Supreme Court decision that lifted earlier injunctions, allowing the Postal Service to proceed with its anti-democratic rulemaking, even as the Court avoided ruling on the legality of the rules themselves. The states argue that the rule-making process is premature and that the federal government has no legitimate authority to dictate how states manage their voter lists.
White House spokesperson Lauren Bis, echoing the administration’s authoritarian agenda, claimed, "The Supreme Court’s ruling was a major win for the security of American elections," and defended the Postal Service’s actions as part of their so-called election-security agenda.
Critics have warned that creating a single national voter database would be a goldmine for foreign interference and would saddle state and local election officials with enormous costs. The Postal Service’s assurances about staffing and security ring hollow, as the risks to democracy and privacy far outweigh any supposed benefits.
The states are demanding the court halt implementation of these draconian rules while litigation continues, insisting that this is an unlawful federal assault on the right of states—and the people—to run their own elections free from authoritarian interference.