Trump Appeals New Court Block on Mail-In Ballot Order as Midterms Near

The Trump administration on Friday appealed a federal judge’s latest ruling that blocked implementation of President Donald Trump’s order to impose new restrictions on mail-in voting.

The move escalated a court fight over election rules just days before states are scheduled to begin sending ballots for the November midterm elections.

The notice of appeal came after U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston issued a 14-day temporary restraining order Thursday blocking the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing key portions of a new rule stemming from Trump’s March executive order.

The case is now headed to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and could ultimately return to the Supreme Court, which only days ago gave the administration an interim victory by lifting an earlier lower-court block while leaving the underlying legal questions unresolved.

Trump signed the executive order on March 31, directing the administration to take a series of steps aimed at tightening requirements for mail-in and absentee voting in federal elections.

Among other provisions, the order directed federal agencies to create state-specific lists of eligible voters and instructed the Postal Service not to transmit mail-in or absentee ballots from individuals who were not included on those lists.

The order also directed USPS to establish new requirements for ballot envelopes and other election-mail procedures.

The White House has said the measures are intended to strengthen election integrity and ensure that mail ballots are distributed only to eligible voters.

The order immediately prompted legal challenges from states and voting-rights organizations, which argued that Trump was attempting to exercise authority over election administration that the Constitution assigns to states and Congress.

The challengers also argued that the president lacked authority to direct USPS to impose new election requirements on states.

Talwani initially sided with the challengers, blocking major portions of Trump's order as the litigation moved forward.

The administration appealed and ultimately asked the Supreme Court to intervene, arguing that the lower court should not have blocked the order while the Postal Service was still developing the regulations needed to implement it.

The Supreme Court on Aug. 24 sided with the administration on that procedural question.

In a 6-3 decision, the justices stayed the lower-court injunction, allowing the administration to continue moving forward with the plan while the broader litigation proceeded.

But the Supreme Court did not issue a final ruling declaring Trump's executive order lawful.

Instead, the majority focused on the timing of the states' original lawsuit, concluding that the challenge had come before USPS had issued its final rule.

The court said that because the final rule had not yet been issued, the states' alleged injuries were not sufficiently concrete to support the earlier challenge.

The Supreme Court's opinion explicitly left the door open for the states to challenge the final USPS rule once it was issued.

That is precisely what happened.

After USPS finalized its new rule, a coalition of states and voting-rights groups returned to court with fresh challenges targeting the completed regulations.

The new litigation includes more than two dozen states, according to reports, and argues that the USPS requirements are unconstitutional and could impose substantial administrative burdens on state election systems.

 

The final rule requires states to provide USPS with information about voters receiving mail ballots and establishes new requirements for ballot envelopes.

Among the changes are requirements involving standardized envelope formats and individualized tracking technology, as well as a USPS-managed system for election-related voter information.

USPS has argued that the changes are intended to create greater consistency in election mail and help ensure that ballots being mailed correspond to eligible voters.

Opponents contend that the rules go beyond the Postal Service's authority and could interfere with states' constitutional responsibility for administering elections.

The timing has become one of the central issues in the latest court battle.

States would have to make changes to ballot envelopes, election-management systems and other procedures while preparing for an election that is now only weeks away.

Talwani's latest ruling concluded that the states face significant practical difficulties in implementing the new requirements on such a compressed timetable.

Her temporary restraining order will remain in effect for 14 days while she considers whether a longer-lasting injunction should be issued.

A hearing is scheduled for Sept. 3.

The administration's Friday appeal seeks to overturn that temporary block and allow USPS to enforce the new requirements while the broader legal dispute continues.

The appeal also sets up the possibility of another rapid trip through the federal courts, potentially putting the matter before the Supreme Court again before the November election.

The stakes are significant because mail voting is a major component of American elections.

More than 30% of voters used mail ballots in the 2024 presidential election, according to Reuters, meaning changes to the rules governing ballot delivery could affect millions of voters and election officials.

The dispute ultimately raises a broader constitutional question over who has authority to establish rules governing federal elections.

The Trump administration maintains that the president and federal agencies have authority to ensure the integrity of federal election procedures and that the new requirements are necessary to protect the voting process.

The states challenging the order argue that the Constitution gives state legislatures the primary role in prescribing the rules for federal elections, subject to Congress' authority, and does not give the president unilateral power to rewrite those rules.

The Supreme Court has not yet resolved that underlying question.

For now, the legal fight is unfolding against an increasingly tight election calendar.

North Carolina is scheduled to be the first state to begin mailing absentee ballots for the November general election, with county boards of elections set to begin sending requested ballots on Friday, Sept. 4, according to the North Carolina State Board of Elections.

Other states also have early mail-ballot schedules, meaning election officials around the country are preparing to send ballots while the courts are still deciding whether the new federal requirements can take effect.

© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.