Full Breakdown
Appeals Court Blocks Trump-Backed USPS Mail-Ballot Rule Ahead of Midterms
By Drooid · · How we work
Court Decision and Immediate Effect
On September 10, a three-judge panel of the Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Trump administration’s request to lift a preliminary injunction that bars the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) from enforcing a new rule tied to President Donald Trump’s March executive order on mail-in voting. The injunction, issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, remains in place, preventing the USPS from requiring states to submit voter lists and barcode-encoded ballot envelopes.
Legislative and Executive Background
President Trump’s March 2024 executive order directed the USPS to adopt a “Final Rule” that would:
- Require states to provide the USPS with lists of voters slated to receive mail ballots.
- Mandate unique barcodes on all outbound and return ballot envelopes.
- Allow the USPS to refuse delivery of ballots that do not meet the new standards.
Democratic-led states and voting-rights groups argue the rule violates the Constitution’s allocation of election administration to the states. The DOJ defended it as a modest data-security measure, but the appellate panel rejected that rationale.
Scope of Mail-In Voting in the United States
- All 50 states permit some form of mail-in voting.
- Twenty-nine states allow voters to request a mail ballot without providing a reason.
- Eight states conduct their elections entirely by mail.
A coalition of 24 states plus the District of Columbia is litigating, asserting the rule would create “chaos and widespread disenfranchisement” for mail-ballot voters.
Official Statements & Responses
- The USPS says it stands ready to implement the rule if the injunction is lifted, but has not commented on the appellate decision.
On-the-Ground Impact
In Texas, service-member Kelsi Kiper said the potential rule could force her to spend roughly $2,000 on travel to vote in person. In Wisconsin, Don Millis, chair of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, warned that compliance would be “virtually impossible.”
Data & Statistics Highlighted in the Case
- A whistleblower statement released on September 1 by an anonymous federal official—publicized by Senator Richard Blumenthal—alleged the USPS was rushing to implement the system, risking disruption of ballot delivery.
Criticism & Opposition
Voting-rights groups, including the League of Women Voters, argue the rule would disenfranchise voters who cannot quickly reprint compliant envelopes or add barcodes. State officials have warned that the timeline—less than eight weeks before the November 3 midterms—does not allow for the required redesign of ballot materials.
Verbatim Quotes
- “it would be impossible for some States to reprint compliant envelopes” — Don Millis
- “Whenever we have change in the system close to an election, it has the potential to create confusion and chaos," explained Tammy Patrick, chief programs officer for the National Association of Election Officials.” — Tammy Patrick, National Association of Election Officials
- “I'm just concerned that there will be a hiccup or there might be a barrier in place for me," Kiper says.” — Kelsi Kiper
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
What’s Next
The 6-3 conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on the administration’s request to lift the injunction “soon.” A ruling in favor of the administration could reinstate the USPS rule before the November 3 midterms; a denial would keep the status quo, allowing states to continue using existing mail-ballot procedures.