Full Breakdown
Appeals Court Blocks Trump Mail-in Voting Order
7/26/2026, 4:05:55 AM
Court Decision Blocks Mail-in Voting Order
On a Saturday, the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the Justice Department’s request to lift an injunction that had been secured on June 25 by a federal judge in Washington, D.C. The 2-1 ruling kept in place the injunction that bars enforcement of President Donald Trump’s executive order aimed at tightening mail-in voting rules in 23 states and the District of Columbia. The court held that the order imposes “rapidly approaching deadlines” that states must meet now, despite the lack of finalized federal implementation actions.
Background: Trump’s Voting Restrictions
President Trump signed the executive order in March after years of promoting tighter mail-in voting rules and advancing the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen through widespread voter fraud. The order directed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to compile state-by-state lists of confirmed U.S. citizens eligible to vote, required the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) to deliver ballots only to voters on those lists, and instructed the Justice Department to prioritize prosecutions of local officials who issued ballots to “ineligible” voters. Earlier in the year, a separate executive order requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration and limiting the counting of mail ballots was also blocked by the courts.
Legal Reasoning and Official Positions
The Justice Department argued that the lawsuit challenging the order was premature because federal agencies had not yet finalized the required actions. The appellate judges rejected that argument, noting that the order’s deadlines compel immediate state compliance. U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, who issued the original injunction, found that the president lacked authority to compel DHS to create voter-eligibility lists and that USPS had no statutory power to impose binding mail-in voting regulations. She also warned that the order could be used to intimidate local officials with the threat of criminal prosecution.
Implications and Next Steps
The Justice Department indicated it may seek Supreme Court intervention if the appellate decision remains unaltered. The ruling preserves the status quo for mail-in voting in the affected states ahead of the September primaries and the November elections that will determine control of Congress. Stakeholders will watch for any further legal challenges or administrative actions related to the broader package of voting-restriction proposals the Trump administration has pursued.
