Injunction Now Blocks USPS Ballot Refusals Through Nov. 3

A federal court has barred the Postal Service from refusing to deliver mail ballots, with the injunction protecting voters through the November 3, 2026 election.

A federal District Court issued a preliminary injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service from enforcing key parts of a rule that would have operationalized President Trump's March 31 executive order restricting mail voting. Under the rule, USPS could have refused to deliver mail ballots to certain voters. The court found the rule was likely unconstitutional and unlawful, and said enforcing it would make voter disenfranchisement "practically inevitable." The injunction, in place through the November 3, 2026 election, bars USPS from refusing ballots that miss the rule's many requirements, though states may voluntarily comply with parts of it.

Timing is the crux: states are already sending midterm ballots. According to Florida's Voice, North Carolina began mailing ballots, Alabama is scheduled to start September 9, and at least five other states are expected to follow the next week — none required to follow the new rule. The Brennan Center notes states are already beginning to send mail ballots to voters for the November election, and the injunction provides protection from the chaos the rule would unleash. Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in the Supreme Court filing that the government faces irreversible harm while ballots go out, calling states' compliance-harm claims overblown.

The blocked rule required states to follow specific guidelines for designing mail ballot envelopes, create unique bar codes for every ballot, and upload an advance list of all mail voters to a new, untested federal portal that is not yet operational. Dozens of state and local officials explained to the court in detail how it would be impossible to comply for the November elections, while only one state submitted a declaration claiming it would likely be able to comply. The court also noted there is no evidence on record of fraud in mail ballots, undercutting the rule's stated rationale.

The lawsuit was filed by a coalition of nonpartisan civic organizations: the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, the League of Women Voters, Association of Americans Resident Overseas, U.S. Vote Foundation, OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates, and Delta Sigma Theta Sorority, Inc., represented by the ACLU, Brennan Center for Justice, Legal Defense Fund, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC, and LatinoJustice PRLDEF. The court recognized immediate and irreparable harm: members are threatened with grave harm — disenfranchisement — if they do not receive a mail ballot from their local election official, a threat the court called imminent.

Nevada Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar welcomed the ruling in a statement to KTNV Las Vegas, saying: "The President's objective is to cause chaos in the hope that voters will give up and simply not participate. I'm grateful to the court for blocking yet another attempt to upend our elections." Aguilar added that Nevada will continue standing up for states' constitutional authority to administer elections and said the administration had put postal workers in a difficult position. He previously told the station the November 3 election would go on as expected despite the mail-in ballot order.

The Trump administration has refiled an emergency appeal asking the Supreme Court to lift the block, its third request to the high court in under six weeks on related mail-ballot rules, per Florida's Voice. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, overseeing the appeal, has set a Wednesday deadline for responses, meaning a decision could come midweek at the earliest. The administration called the measures constitutional "reasonable preparation" for election-related mail, while opponents argue they would federalize elections typically managed by states. Plaintiffs' counsel said USPS has no constitutional or federal law authority over how states administer mail voting.