The Supreme Court on Monday rejected the Trump administration's attempt to limit mail-in voting for now, keeping in place a lower court decision blocking the U.S. Postal Service from implementing new restrictions.

"The Government is unlikely to succeed on the merits of its challenge to the District Court's preliminary injunction," the ruling said, according to ABC News. The decision clears the way for states to continue sending out mail-in ballots as planned ahead of the midterms.

The court did not issue a final merits ruling on the underlying dispute, but the interim outcome means the restrictions will not apply to the 2026 elections.

The proposal would have required states to report basic voter information — a voter's name and home address — to USPS, attached to a unique barcode on every mail-in ballot distributed.

Postal workers would then deliver ballots only addressed to voters who appear on the state-provided list, per ABC News reporting. The administration insisted the rules would impose only "modest" ballot design and review requirements and that the data submissions were not onerous.

Democratic-led states and voter advocacy groups countered that the USPS regulations amount to an attempt to federalize elections that are historically and constitutionally managed by each state.

A conservative-majority court that has often sided with the administration declined to let the plan take effect.

According to ABC News, Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, with Alito writing in an eight-page dissent that the new policy falls within the Postal Service's broad authority to regulate the mail and calling the plaintiffs' challenge a "Hail Mary pass."

Notably, Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed with the majority but rested largely on timing: applying the rule in the 2026 elections, less than two months from the midterms, would be an "arbitrary and capricious" violation of the Administrative Procedure Act because election officials lack time to implement it.

He still saw "at least a fair prospect" the rule falls within USPS's statutory authority.

The case reached the court as a challenge to a preliminary injunction, meaning the justices weighed whether the government was likely to succeed on the merits — and the majority concluded it was not, per ABC News.

The administration argued USPS's broad exemption from administrative law shielded the policy, while the suing organizations said the requirement to hand over name, address, and barcode data of intended recipients was intrusive. The dissent added that the organizations that sued lacked standing.

The context is a busy 2026-27 term: The Guardian reports the same court is being asked to rule on challenges to the administration's immigration and deportation policies, a climate lawsuit against energy companies, an attempt to loosen restrictions on assault-style rifles, and Arizona voter-proof-of-citizenship laws.

The ruling likely ensures that states can continue mailing out ballots for the midterms as planned, removing an operational disruption for state and local election officials weeks before voting.

Mail-in ballots had already begun reaching voters — ABC News noted an official mail-in ballot for the November general election in Hudson County, New Jersey, seen September 11, 2026.

The broader stakes extend past one election: advocacy groups framing the dispute warn it touches the constitutional line between federal oversight of the mail and state control of elections, while the administration has pushed unfounded claims of widespread mail ballot fraud, according to ABC News.

A decision sustaining the plan could have reshaped ballot logistics nationwide.

According to ABC News, the legal battle over ballot restrictions has effectively been punted to the 2028 election, since Monday's ruling only blocks the rules for the current cycle.

The dissent's arithmetic matters for that fight: at least three justices — Alito, Thomas, and, on the merits, Kavanaugh's sympathetic framing — appear open to the administration's arguments the next time this case or a similar one returns to the high court.

The administration could also refile its rule with more lead time before a future election, addressing the timing concern Kavanaugh identified. For now, the USPS remains blocked from implementing the new restrictions, and mail-in voting proceeds under existing state-managed procedures.