The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Sunday, Sept. 6 to block a federal judge’s injunction against new U.S. Postal Service mail-ballot rules — the third time this cycle it has taken the fight to the justices — just as ballots are already going out in North Carolina and more states prepare to start mailing this week, according to Washington Examiner and Fox News.
Why it matters: Roughly a third of U.S. voters are expected to cast ballots by mail in November, so a fight over how those ballots get verified and tracked is effectively a fight over the mechanics of the midterms themselves. Because ballots are already in transit in some states, the Court is being asked to referee the rules of the election in real time rather than after the fact.
Driving the news:
Solicitor General John Sauer filed the emergency appeal, asking the Court to stay a preliminary injunction that U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani issued Sept. 6 — an extension of the temporary restraining order she first granted Aug. 27 — according to Washington Examiner.
The underlying rule, from Trump’s March 31 executive order, requires mail-ballot envelopes to carry an official “Election Mail” logo and a unique Intelligent Mail barcode, and requires states to submit envelope designs and voter list data through a USPS-run portal, per Washington Examiner.
Sauer warned the Court that “once those ballot envelopes enter the mailstream, there is no retrieving them,” arguing the injunction is creating confusion as North Carolina began mailing ballots Sept. 3, Alabama was set to follow Sept. 9, and at least five more states were expected to start the week of Sept. 13, per Fox News.
It’s the third time the administration has asked the Supreme Court to intervene in this fight; the Court previously let the plan proceed on an earlier, separate piece of the same executive order without ruling on its ultimate legality, per Fox News.
By the numbers:
3rd — number of times the administration has now asked the Supreme Court to step into this fight, per Fox News.
~1/3 — roughly the share of U.S. voters expected to vote by mail in the November midterms, per Fox News.
Aug. 27 to Sept. 6 — the span from Judge Talwani’s initial 14-day restraining order to her extended preliminary injunction, per Washington Examiner.
Sept. 3, 9, and the week of Sept. 13 — the mailing start dates for North Carolina, Alabama, and at least five additional states, per Washington Examiner.
What they’re saying: Solicitor General John Sauer told the Court the administration’s postal rules are “a lawful and modest exercise of rulemaking authority delegated by Congress to the Postal Service,” and that USPS itself won’t determine voter eligibility or count any ballots — states retain that control, per Fox News.
The other side: Democratic-led states, voting-rights groups and some election administrators oppose the rule, arguing the new envelope, barcode and data-submission requirements can’t realistically be implemented in the weeks before November without risking confusion at the polls — the core objection underlying the lawsuit that produced Judge Talwani’s injunction, per Washington Examiner. No approved-outlet report surfaced a direct quote from an opposing official as of this writing.
What’s next:
The Supreme Court must decide whether to grant the stay — a ruling that could come at any time given ballots are already being mailed in multiple states, per Fox News.
If the Court allows the rule to take effect, litigation over whether it’s ultimately constitutional continues in the lower courts even as it’s enforced through the midterms, per Washington Examiner.
The bottom line: This is now the third time a single dispute over mail-ballot administration has landed at the Supreme Court in one election cycle — and the justices are being asked to settle it with ballots already in the mail. However they rule, the decision will shape how millions of mail ballots are verified this November and adds another flashpoint over how far Trump can push executive control over election mechanics weeks before voters decide control of Congress.
Go deeper: