WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s administration has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to allow enforcement of new federal restrictions on mail-in voting, escalating a legal fight over election rules just as states begin sending ballots for the November midterm elections.
The Justice Department filed an emergency request Thursday seeking to lift a temporary order issued by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Boston. Her ruling prevents the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing new requirements that could affect how states prepare, track and mail absentee ballots.
Under the Postal Service rule, states would have to provide lists of mail-ballot recipients through a federal system and use approved ballot envelopes carrying unique barcodes. Ballots that do not meet those requirements could be refused for delivery, a prospect that Democratic-led states and voting-rights organizations say could prevent otherwise eligible voters from receiving or returning ballots.
The administration argues that the Postal Service has authority to regulate mail moving through the federal postal system and says the changes are intended to improve election security. In its Supreme Court filing, the Justice Department said the policy was designed to “protect the mails from being used to commit voter fraud.” Evidence of widespread fraud involving mail ballots in U.S. elections has remained rare.
Talwani issued a 14-day restraining order after concluding that the challengers were likely to show the new requirements conflict with constitutional provisions giving states primary responsibility for administering elections. A temporary restraining order is a short-term court directive that preserves existing conditions while judges consider whether a longer injunction is warranted.
The dispute has also raised questions about whether the federal government can put the new system into operation in time. During a hearing Thursday, Talwani questioned government lawyers about whether an online portal needed to administer the program was functioning. “I have nothing,” she said after noting that she lacked detailed evidence from the Postal Service explaining how the system would operate.
The controversy has taken on greater urgency because North Carolina was scheduled Friday to become the first state to begin broadly sending mail ballots for the Nov. 3 midterm elections, with other states following later in September. Election officials say ballot designs, envelopes and administrative procedures are generally established well before voting begins, making major last-minute changes difficult.
The Supreme Court has already considered an earlier stage of the dispute. On Aug. 24, its 6-3 conservative majority lifted an earlier injunction against Trump’s executive order, concluding that the challenge had been brought prematurely because the Postal Service had not yet issued final implementing regulations. The justices did not decide whether the underlying restrictions are constitutional.
Civil rights groups and Democratic-led states returned to court after the Postal Service issued its final rule. Sophia Lin Lakin of the American Civil Liberties Union said the latest intervention by the administration was creating unnecessary uncertainty and argued that existing voting procedures should remain in place.
The Postal Service has separately faced criticism from a whistleblower who alleged that the computer system being developed for the new requirements was rushed and insufficiently tested. The Postal Service has said it will cooperate with Congress and the courts and that it shares the goal of ensuring election mail is handled securely and reliably. The White House has rejected claims that the technology is unusually complex.
Mail voting has a long history in the United States. Formal absentee voting expanded during the Civil War, when many states allowed soldiers serving away from home to participate in the 1864 presidential election. Today, every state provides some form of absentee voting, although eligibility and procedures vary widely.
Its use increased sharply during the COVID-19 pandemic and remains significant. About 30% of ballots cast in the 2024 general election were submitted by mail, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, compared with 43% during the pandemic-era 2020 election.
The legal battle is politically important because the November elections will determine control of Congress. Republicans are seeking to preserve their congressional majorities, while Democrats are trying to gain seats that could give them greater power to challenge Trump’s domestic and foreign policy agenda. The fight is also being closely watched as another test of the boundary between presidential authority, federal agencies and the traditional power of states to run elections.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who handles emergency matters arising from the federal appeals court covering Massachusetts, gave the challengers until Sept. 8 to respond to the administration’s latest request. That means the Supreme Court could again be asked to make a consequential ruling on election procedures while voting is already getting underway
