Trump Reinstates Supreme Court Bid On Mail-In Voting
The Trump administration filed a third appeal with the US Supreme Court on Sunday, seeking approval for its mail-in ballot plan. The request asks the justices to allow the United States Postal Service (USPS) to withhold ballots from states that have not verified voter citizenship. This move follows a series of legal challenges to the new federal regulations.
Solicitor General D. John Sauer submitted the emergency application. He argued that the government is likely to succeed on the merits in both active cases. The filing asks the court to pause enforcement while appeals proceed in the First Circuit and the Supreme Court.
A Third Bid for Federal Control
Sauer wrote that state election officials will “retain full control over who is permitted to vote in federal elections in their state by US mail.” He characterized the new rule as a valid exercise of USPS authority. The administration also withdrew a petition filed just one day earlier on Thursday.
This application stems from Executive Order 14399, issued on March 31. The order directs the Department of Homeland Security and the Social Security Administration to compile lists of confirmed US citizens. It also requires the USPS to establish specific standards for mail-ballot envelopes, including unique barcodes and agency approval.
The new rule took effect on August 21. It was published in the Federal Register on August 26. The policy aims to verify citizenship data before ballots are sent. This requirement places a new burden on state election boards.
Judicial Pushback and Legal Tensions
The League of Women Voters and a coalition of states, led by California, challenged the legality of the order. They argued the federal government exceeded its constitutional authority. A US District Court judge in Massachusetts initially issued a temporary restraining order on August 27.
Related Post: Supreme Court Upholds Suspension of Ghana’s Chief Justice
US District Judge Indira Talwani later replaced that order with a preliminary injunction. She barred the USPS from enforcing several provisions of the rule. Her ruling stated that Congress has “never delegated its Elections Clause power to the USPS.” She found the rule unconstitutional where it intrudes on state powers.
The states argued that the preliminary injunction made the administration’s earlier application moot. They informed the Supreme Court that the lower court’s decision rendered the previous filing unnecessary. The legal battle continues to shape the administrative framework for the upcoming elections.
The tension between federal executive power and state election authority remains unresolved. If the Supreme Court grants the stay, the USPS could immediately begin withholding ballots from non-compliant states. This scenario would likely trigger further litigation or a rapid shift in state compliance strategies. The outcome will determine whether federal verification standards override state-level election management in the short term.
Current Status of the Filings
The administration asked the Supreme Court to stay the August 27 restraining order last Thursday. The next day, Judge Talwani issued the preliminary injunction. The states then notified the court that this new order dissolved the need for the previous stay application.
The current filing supersedes those earlier requests. It consolidates the administration’s legal position into a single emergency application. The justices have not yet issued a decision on this third bid.
Legal frameworks governing mail-in voting are changing quickly. State officials are preparing for potential enforcement while monitoring the Supreme Court’s docket. The resolution of these cases will define the operational rules for federal election mailings.
