Supreme Court Allows Trump Mail-Ballot Executive Order to Proceed Pending Further Litigation
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.
The Supreme Court let a Trump administration order affecting mail voting move forward temporarily, while lower courts have issued restraining orders, leaving states uncertain about compliance ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to halt a Trump administration executive order that would give the U.S. Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security new authority over mail-ballot processing, allowing the measure to remain in effect for now. The justices did not address the order’s merits, leaving the issue open for further legal challenges.
Within days of the high-court decision, a federal judge in Massachusetts issued a 14-day restraining order, pausing implementation of the order. The judge said the regulation is likely unconstitutional and would be practically impossible to comply with for the upcoming 2026 midterm elections.
The executive order proposes three main changes: requiring new ballot envelopes with a specific barcode and official logo; obligating states to notify the Postal Service of their intent to use such envelopes at least 90 days before an election; and mandating that states provide a list of every resident slated to receive a mail ballot, which would be cross-checked against a list compiled by the Department of Homeland Security. Critics say the rules could force states to incur significant costs to redesign ballots, reprint envelopes, and conduct voter outreach.
Voting-rights advocates warn that states with large mail-ballot populations, such as California, Colorado and Washington, would face higher expenses to meet the new envelope standards, while states that have already printed ballots, including North Carolina and Massachusetts, may be unable to replace them in time. "It’s too late. They printed it out. They can’t print out all new ballot envelopes before the election," said Liz Avore, senior adviser at the nonpartisan Voting Rights Lab.
Legal battles are expected to continue as states and voting-rights groups seek additional injunctions. The outcome will determine whether states must overhaul their mail-voting procedures or maintain existing practices ahead of the midterm elections.