DOJ Pushes Supreme Court to Reinstate USPS Mail-Ballot Rule, Threatening Voter Access Ahead of Midterms
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 Justice Department is urging the Supreme Court to overturn a district court order that blocks a restrictive new Postal Service rule on mail-in ballots, claiming it's necessary before the November elections—a move critics say could suppress votes and undermine democracy.
The Justice Department has filed an urgent petition with the Supreme Court, seeking to immediately lift a restraining order issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani that blocks key parts of a controversial new Postal Service rule on mail-in ballots. The administration insists the rule, finalized in late March, is needed to prevent so-called voter fraud and to give states time to comply before the November 2026 midterm elections.
'With respect to the November 2026 election, the order thus partially nullifies the Postal Service’s efforts to address the risk that the federal mails will be used to perpetrate voter fraud, a particularly pernicious species of fraud that dilutes the votes of lawful voters, prevents election results from reflecting the will of the American people, and undermines ‘public confidence in the integrity of the electoral process,’' wrote Solicitor General John Sauer in the filing.
Judge Talwani’s order allows states to continue preparing ballot envelopes as they see fit, but the Justice Department claims this creates confusion and could leave states unprepared. In reality, the judge previously ruled that the rule would force states to obtain USPS approval for ballot designs and upload sensitive voter data to a new electronic portal—onerous steps she said were impossible to complete before the election deadline and could open the door to privacy violations.
The district court found the rule likely unconstitutional, as it overrides state authority over elections without congressional approval and imposes an 'impossible' compliance timeline. Many states have already begun mailing ballots, with some required to start as early as next week, and simply lack the time and resources to meet these new federal demands.
The government tries to downplay the rule, claiming it merely codifies existing USPS recommendations that many states have already adopted, and denies it amounts to a federal takeover of elections. It describes the changes as 'modest' and dismisses the plaintiffs’ concerns as unfounded.
The Supreme Court previously overturned Talwani’s earlier injunction, arguing the rule had not yet been finalized, but that does not resolve the current request for a stay. The case will continue through the appellate process, with voting rights and the future of mail-in ballots hanging in the balance.